1) Time of iPad
Apple Computer’s iconic Chief Executive Officer Steve Jobs has made another bid to create digital history. Following months of speculation, he unveiled the iPad, a 24.64 cm (9.7 inch) touch-screen tablet. This device, he proclaimed, lets people hold the internet in their hands. Mr. Jobs hopes to make the same game-changing impact on the digital world that he did with the iPod, which has sold 250 million units, and the iPhone. Apple’s nifty new creation is posit ioned as a “third category” mobile device — between the laptop and the smartphone. It is 1.27 cm (half an inch) thin and tips the scales at 0.68 kg. The iPad can browse the web, zoom into maps, do email, display and share photos, play video and music, and enthuse gamers with a raft of ready games. It can turn into a digital canvas with one application, complete with an easel and brushes to create art anywhere. It doubles up as an e-reader for books, with an attached online bookstore. The e-reader model for downloadable books was made popular by Amazon’s Kindle; the iPad hopes to expand that base with an augmented virtual reading experience that is comparable to print (although the backlighting can be a problem). The reader can pleasurably flip the pages back and forth. The publishers can even add colour pictures and video to the virtual pages.
The stock market did not react to the iPad with instant enthusiasm, but that hardly settles its future. Mr. Jobs may be resorting to hyperbole when he claims the iPad does many things better than a laptop or a smartphone. But what industry sceptics sometimes forget is that Apple’s runaway success is not just about functions — it is also about charisma, starting with design and feel. The iPod rewrote — and how — the rules of how people discover, purchase, and enjoy music. The iPhone (with its below-par battery storage) and iPod Touch unleashed the development of over 140,000 software applications, which have been downloaded three billion times in 18 months. That the iPad can run virtually all of them ‘from day one’ gives it a huge advantage in the consumer market. Apple now hopes to enter a whole new realm, where technology and the liberal arts converge and entire sectors such as newspapers, magazines, video producers, game developers, and book publishers come on board. For the media, the iPad opens up fresh possibilities on how content can be created and distributed and, crucially, monetised. The models with the 3G cellular option (built-in Wi-Fi and Bluetooth are standard) will connect the user to news, video, books, and key sports channels on the go. But universal appeal may elude the web-focussed iPad if it does not offer compatibility with Flash and Java formats; nearly 70 per cent of games and 75 per cent of video on the Internet depend on Flash support. To become the convergence device of choice, Apple’s latest creation must aim to embrace all web-technologies and platforms and be global and open.
2) Unrepentant Blair
On January 29, Tony Blair appeared before the Iraq Inquiry, the Chilcot inquiry, in London. It was unlikely that the self-righteous former British Prime Minister would reveal anything new. Most of the relevant facts are already public. Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction: none have been found since the invasion. President George W. Bush and Mr. Blair took the decision to invade Iraq in April 2002; there was no link whatever between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda. Iraq, ha ving been disarmed under U.N. supervision after 1991, was seen as a threat not even by its own neighbours. The list is almost endless. The British Cabinet was not given all the documents on which the decision to invade was based; the dossier claiming that Iraqi missiles could reach the U.K. within 45 minutes was both plagiarised and mendacious; the invasion was under-funded because preparations would have excited public suspicion; there was no planning for the post-invasion period. Mr. Blair has himself said publicly that the purpose of the invasion was regime change. Finally, only one British legal opinion, by Attorney General Lord Goldsmith, held the invasion not to be a breach of international law.
Against that background, Mr. Blair has done no more than deny that the invasion was based on “a lie or a conspiracy or a deceit or a deception.” His basic defence is that he believed everything he claimed at the time. This may show Mr. Blair’s conviction that all his actions were right if he thought they were right, but such psychological factors cannot compensate for the enormous failures of the British political process that enabled the illegal invasion. Three high-level Cabinet resignations in March 2003, rather than the one by Robin Cook, may have been enough to deter Mr. Blair. Rejection of war by Parliament, despite not being binding under the then U.K. law, would have almost certainly been enough. Although unconfirmed reports said that 95 per cent of the 386 ruling Labour MPs were against the war, on the day only 139 voted against it. Nothing has been done to address these systemic failures. That is particularly worrying considering that Mr. Blair ended his deposition by claiming, with unbelievable arrogance, that Iran now poses the kind of threat he claimed Iraq did in 2003.
3) Challenge of climate change, post-Copenhagen
R.K. Pachauri
Are the world and human society in general ready and willing to take action on critical issues that require a major change in the manner in which we produce and consume goods and services?
The science of climate change is now well established. This is the result of painstaking work of over two decades carried out by thousands of scientists drawn from across the globe to assess every aspect of climate change for the benefit of humanity. The Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was produced in the year 2007, and highlighted, on the basis of careful observations extending over a long period of time, that “warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice and rising global average sea level.” It was also stated clearly that most of the “observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic GHG concentrations. It is likely that there has been significant anthropogenic warming over the past 50 years averaged over each continent (except Antarctica).”
It is important to remember that changes in climate are not limited merely to an increase in temperature, but in fact involve several impacts such as an increase in intensity and frequency of floods, droughts, heat waves and extreme precipitation events. Therefore, these pose serious implications for the availability of water in several parts of the world and could have negative impacts on the yields of several crops.
In fact, IPCC’s projections indicate that in Africa, for instance, as early as 2020, between 75 and 250 million people are projected to be exposed to increased water stress due to climate change. By the same year, in some countries, yields from rain-fed agriculture could be reduced by up to 50 per cent. As a result, agricultural production including access to food in many African countries is projected to be severely compromised. This would affect their food security adversely and exacerbate the problem of malnutrition which is already quite serious in several countries of Africa. In India, too, we are likely to witness climate change in several manifestations, which are likely to be far more serious than anything we have seen in the 20th century, in case no action is taken to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) globally.
In the light of these projected changes in climate and their various impacts, it was hoped that the Copenhagen Conference of the Parties (CoP) would be able to arrive at a binding agreement to ensure that all countries of the world take effective action, firstly in agreeing to reduce global emissions of GHGs with a sense of urgency. Secondly, given the serious nature of impacts in some of the poorest regions of the world it was anticipated that the developed countries would provide significant financial resources and facilitate access to technology by which these countries could adapt to the impacts of climate change and, at the same time, undertake mitigation measures. It was also seen as urgent that developed countries reduce their emissions adequately in keeping with their historical responsibility for human-induced climate change. Global efforts are required to bring the earth’s climate into some degree of stability.
One of the favourable outcomes of the Copenhagen conference last December was the acceptance of a 2°C limit on temperature increase that the countries who are part of the Copenhagen Accord laid down as a target. However, this Accord, which was reached in the final hours of the extended meeting, is not yet universally accepted, and in fact is likely to receive some resistance from a number of countries. At the same time, we know that if the world is to stabilise temperature increase to between 2.0-2.4°C, then certain conditions would require to be met. The first of these conditions would imply that global emissions of GHGs would have to peak no later than 2015. This outcome is now greatly in doubt, because the world has not come to any agreement on developed countries reducing their emissions of GHGs by 2020 at levels that would aim to bring about stabilisation of GHG concentration. Unless we have a clear roadmap for reduction in emissions by 2020, we cannot expect peaking of global emissions to take place any time before that year. It is also significant that the BASIC countries (Brazil, South Africa, India and China) have announced voluntary targets for reduction in intensity of GDP growth.
The world has been providing a great deal of attention to action on the part of several countries in the world, and many political leaders responsible for policy have been visible in their efforts to bring about global action on climate change. The U.N. Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, organised a high level meeting on September 22, 2009, where over a hundred world leaders including heads of state and heads of government participated in deliberations dealing specifically with climate change. The Copenhagen conference attracted an even larger number of world leaders, and this initially provided promise of action by which the world would deal with various aspects of this challenge. However, despite the fact that in many countries there is strong grassroots support for action and several world leaders have not only articulated but shown through domestic action their desire to act firmly, the result globally has been far less than satisfactory.
This situation raises a major question on whether the world and human society in general are ready and willing to take action on critical issues that require a major change in the manner in which we produce and consume goods and services. Since industrialisation began the world has moved on a path of escalating production and consumption of newer and newer goods and services, which has had serious impacts on the environment and the natural resources of this planet. Fortunately, in the developed countries, several longstanding chronic problems like air and water pollution, deforestation and loss of biodiversity have been brought largely under check, but the emissions of GHGs continue unmitigated against the need for a rapid transformation of the economic system. Unfortunately, the desired transformation is being blocked effectively by vested interests which see a loss in their own economic power and financial benefits likely that change in economic activities may bring, for instance, towards a greater use of renewable energy and reduced use of fossil fuels.
In any area of new knowledge, historically the world has witnessed a number of people who remain sceptics and resistant to change in conventional ways and customs. Today, the power of sceptics has become extremely high because economic interests which resist change support them on a substantial scale. The Center for Public Integrity in Washington D.C. issued a report in March 2009, in which it reported that 770 companies had hired an estimated 2304 lobbyists to influence federal policy on climate change. That represented a 300 per cent increase in numbers in just five years, amounting to four climate lobbyists for every member of Congress. As it happens, this enormous economic power and manifestation of vested interest is not confined to Washington alone, and the lobbyists and the sceptics are flexing their muscles right from Australia to Britain to North America. The current situation is reminiscent of the brutal no-holds-barred campaign carried out by the tobacco lobby when scientific evidence on the link between smoking and cancer became overwhelming and was seen as a threat to their profits.
The outcome of the Copenhagen CoP has only emboldened those who resist change to try every tactic by which they can stall action both at the international as well as the national level in many countries. As a result, therefore, the legislation that is now with the U.S. Senate, as proposed by Senators John Kerry and Barbara Boxer, is running into stiff resistance, and it is possible that this piece of legislation may not see the light of day in the near future. Yet, in the absence of the U.S. being an important component of a global accord, any agreement would remain inadequate and ineffective.
The challenge and opportunity facing human society is, therefore, to launch urgent grassroots action by civil society, business and local governments towards a pattern of sustainable development. National governments and multilateral initiatives would follow inevitably.
(Dr. R.K. Pachauri is Director-General, The Energy & Resources Institute, Chairman, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and Director, Yale Climate and Energy Institute.)
4) Crimes and punishment
Haroon Habib
Five of the killers of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman have been punished at long last, but Bangladesh has still more tasks awaiting it
"Truth and justice have finally prevailed." This has been the near-universal reaction in Bangladesh to the execution on January 28 of five of the 12 former Army officers who in 1975 assassinated Bangladesh's founding father, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman.
Indeed, nearly 35 years after he and his family members, bar Sheikh Hasina and Sheikh Rehena, his two daughters, were gunned down within three-and-a-half years of the country securing Independence from Pakistan, justice has been done to at least half the number of assassins who were behind bars.
The historic trial and the execution of the convicts were no easy tasks. It took almost 13 years to complete the process. The trial took place under the normal law of the land, thanks to the Sheikh Hasina government that came to power through democratic elections a little more than a year ago. The execution of the killers of Bangabandhu, the popular title Mujib still enjoys for having led the struggle for the nation's freedom, amounted to a return to the rule of law, and a warning that anyone who commits a crime should not expect to get away with it easily. It is history that the small South Asian country has created.
For Bangladesh, which fought and finally won the liberation war against the Pakistan military and its religious-political subjugation, the execution of the order of the nation's apex court means more than merely restoring the rule of law. It marks a victory for the secular sprit of the 1971 Liberation War, and a new defeat for those who had unmistakably sought to revive and strengthen the spirit of 1947 that divided British India on communal lines, a spirit that was once thought to have died off.
Bangladesh was haunted for more than three decades by the feeling of guilt that stemmed from justice remaining to be done. Following the August 15, 1975 bloodbath, the country was forced to undertake a reverse journey from a secular nationhood to sectarian Islamisation, almost true to the Pakistani format. It was against this that the liberation fighters shed their blood. Truth to tell, while the country in general welcomed the trial, the hidden masterminds and beneficiaries of the 1975 changeover have become highly disturbed, indeed alarmed.
A good number of people preferred taking the option of forgetting the `black chapter' to start a new one marked by amity and understanding. Perhaps this is what Bangladesh needed most. But they all had mis-perceived the very fundamentals of the nation's political crisis, that it was a huge moral burden on the collective national psyche that the trial could not be completed.
For those who opposed the country's Independence on religious lines and were hand in glove with the Pakistan Army, and who unfortunately led the nation for 30 of its 39 years of existence in collaboration with military and pseudo-democratic rulers, the handing down of the death sentences to the convicts was a blow.
Without doubt, they have all been shocked, rather alarmed. Therefore it is but natural that they would now seek to find every conceivable way to destabilise the Sheikh Hasina government. They also fear that the new government would go for another trial to bring to justice the war criminals who were at work during the Liberation War, and go for changes to the country's Constitution removing certain retrograde provisions introduced under successive military regimes.
Nevertheless, the execution of all bar six of the convicted fugitives has generated a new hope that never again would a murderous conspiracy make it possible to overturn the constitutional path and push the country into a dark phase. The judicial executions have ensured that no sinister forces will rise in the future to put the nation's democracy at risk through extra-constitutional means.
It is a hope that may be generally cherished, but given the country's ground realities such an expectation could also face enormous opposition.
There is no doubt that the 1975 assassinations drilled huge holes in the country's political sphere. They were also instrumental in forcing the new-born nation away from the ideals that led to its attaining Independence from Pakistan. There may have been differences in degree, but all the governments that were in power in Dhaka after the 1975 massacre - from General Ziaur Rahman's to General H.M. Ershad's to Begum Khaleda Zia's - refused to bring the perpetrators to book. In fact, they rehabilitated the self-confessed killers socially and politically, and distorted the nation's meaning of its Independence itself. They virtually took the nation in the reverse direction and systematically undermined democratic values.
As all legal procedures were conformed to and all avenues were exhausted over the last 13 years since the filing of the case in 1996, the convicts who once pronounced their heroism by becoming "self-confessed killers," at one stage prayed for mercy. Understandably, their mercy petitions to the country's President, and the last resort of reviewing the court's judgment, were rejected. One of the most important aspects of the whole process is that the convicts availed themselves of all conceivable legal benefits before being sent to the gallows. By any standard, it was a fair trial.
The trial and execution of the killers is a new beginning for Bangladesh, although the country still has many an unfinished task to be accomplished. While the trial of the war criminals of the 1971 war is yet to start, six more convicts of the 1975 massacre are still at large. The execution of the five detained convicts will heal the nation's emotional wounds to a great extent, but it may take more time for the wounds caused by the extrajudicial murders that had bedevilled the political process to heal.
The Mujib murder was not a "normal" criminal offence; it was a deep-rooted one. It had serious implications for the nation for many years to come. The massacre was linked with country's attainment of Independence from Pakistan. Whatever justification the murderers had chosen to project in order to defend their mischief, ordinary Bangladeshis have hardly acknowledged them. In fact, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the founding father of Bangladesh, became an even more popular and politically inspiring figure over the last three decades.
(Haroon Habib, journalist and author, is himself a veteran of the Bangladesh Liberation War. He can be reached at hh1971@gmail.com)
5) Haiti becomes canvas for debate on approach to aid
Neil MacFarquhar
The fact that Haiti was mired in dysfunction well before the earthquake, despite having received more than $5 billion in aid over about two decades, is fuelling a contentious debate on whether a grand reconstruction plan can finally fix the country or would be doomed to repeat previous failures.
One side argues that Haiti should be temporarily taken over by an international organisation, which would govern it and oversee its rebuilding. On the other extreme, minimalists fervently believe that years of failed, foreign-imposed aid projects underscore that this time Haitians need to develop and implement their own plans. And in between are those who argue for a joint Haitian-international reconstruction agency to administer a kind of Marshall Plan.
Such is the scale of day-to-day demands now, however, that even medium-term reconstruction efforts seem distant. Jeffrey Sachs, a Columbia University economist, proposed that boatloads of aid include at least one ship crammed with fertilizer to jump-start the planting season in March — the country desperately needs to grow more food and to encourage those fleeing the devastated capital to farm. But there were no immediate takers in the official aid flotilla, leaving Mr. Sachs lobbying private shippers.
Indeed, the international aid effort is failing to meet the earliest goals pronounced by the U.N. Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon. Mr. Ban said repeatedly that by the end of last week, the World Food Programme and related organisations would have delivered food to 1 million Haitians; just half of the 2 million he said needed help. On Friday, the number fed stood at 600,000, well short of his goal.
Mr. Ban also promoted a cash-for-work programme to help bring stability, with jobs clearing the rubble at $4 to $5 per day. The organisation’s $575 million emergency appeal for Haiti included $41 million for that programme, but by Friday the jobs programme had only attracted $4.3 million in donations and had employed more than 12,000 Haitians out of an anticipated 200,000, the U.N. Development Programme said.
The United Nations is supposed to excel as ringmaster during international disasters, but rebuilding Haiti may test its limits. Mr. Ban had appointed Bill Clinton as his special envoy to Haiti months before the earthquake, and the former U.S. President met some success in attracting outside investors with his “I honeymooned in Haiti and you should too” mantra. This year, Haiti had anticipated its first economic growth in years, projected to be 4 per cent. But there were still hurdles, not least that the country lacked basics like dependable electric and water supplies. A donor conference last April attracted $402 million in pledges, but only $61 million in actual payments, according to the United Nations.
Mr. Ban is expected to announce any day that Mr. Clinton will take on an expanded role in coordinating U.N. efforts to resurrect Haiti. Indeed, the former President’s high profile has fuelled suggestions that he become the Haiti reconstruction czar. Even before the earthquake, Mr. Clinton had been deflecting criticism that he was becoming a colonial proconsul, and at a news conference last Monday he emphasised the role for Haitians, saying, “In the end, it is their country and their future.”
He also compared the potential for change in Haiti to that of the Lower Ninth Ward in New Orleans, where destruction by Hurricane Katrina became a catalyst for building better, environmentally sound housing.
But the $400 million the U.S. has already spent, with significantly more expected, has prompted calls for an expansive outside supervisory role. “Is it too wild a suggestion to be talking about at least temporarily some sort of receivership?” Sen. Christopher J. Dodd asked during hearings on Thursday in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, noting that Haiti risked slipping back into its old pattern of a few greedy families running the country. Sen. Bob Corker echoed that thought, adding, “I think something far more draconian than just us working behind the scenes to prod reforms and those kinds of things is going to be necessary.”
The three witnesses at the hearing demurred, noting that the U.S. had a mixed record in reconstruction efforts like rebuilding electric plants in Iraq. One of them, Dr. Paul Farmer, the deputy U.N. envoy and a founder of Partners in Health, which has been working in Haiti for more than 20 years, said that the long history of Washington overthrowing or blockading Haitian governments helped create the current dysfunctional government.
A more blunt U.N. official derided the idea of a “Batman-like world plot” to swoop in to rescue Haiti’s future, particularly since the world will be likely to lose interest in a project that could well take a decade.
Some suggest that the reconstruction model might be Aceh, Indonesia, where after the 2004 tsunami a multi-donor fund disbursed some $700 million, mostly to local projects, with an Indonesian, a World Bank representative and the European Union, the biggest donor, each given one oversight vote apiece.
The problem with that model for Haiti, noted David Harland, a senior U.N. official on Latin America, is that the Aceh fund was a minor piece of a strong, wealthy Indonesian government. In impoverished Haiti, a wealthy development agency could well supplant a government just finding its feet economically.
Aid projects already planned had anticipated factory jobs sewing clothes jumping to 150,000 from 24,000 because of a deal giving them 10-year, duty-free access to the U.S. market. Experts believe such plans should move ahead, along with new plans for construction projects that would put tens of thousands of people to work. Many said creating jobs is much more important than outright aid, as the latter could foster dependency.
The debate on whether aid spurs development has been raging for years, and William Easterly of New York University is among those who argue for a minimalist approach to reconstruction with money disbursed to local governments parched for resources. “I think the whole idea of the earthquake being an opportunity for foreigners to do more aggressive interventions is really problematic and objectionable,” he said in an interview, arguing for modest, homegrown plans. “We have tried basically everything in the book already in Haiti as far as grandiose plans, and those haven’t worked.”
Haitians themselves have mixed emotions. Staggering from the destruction, they want foreign help and remain wary of its past. But the central problem worrying them is how their own government, having so utterly failed to deliver services for decades, can muster the capacity, the knowledge, the will and the credibility needed for such a complex task, said John Miller Beauvoir, a 28-year-old Haitian.
Mr. Beauvoir founded an organisation to get young people like him more involved in civic affairs. He thinks non-governmental Haitian organisations and successful Haitians living abroad should get a legal voice in allocating aid money. — © 2010 The New York Times News Service
6) Row over 9/11 terror trial site
Scott Shane
For much of President Barack Obama’s first year in office, his national security team worked to devise a secure plan to send dozens of Yemeni detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba — the largest single group at the prison camp — home to Yemen, perhaps to a rehabilitation programme. Then came the Christmas Day airliner bombing attempt, which was planned in Yemen, and the President put all transfers there on hold.
Since November, the administration had been preparing to move the highest-profile Guantanamo prisoners — Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and four accomplices accused of plotting the September 11, 2001, attacks — to Manhattan for a federal criminal trial.
But overwhelming opposition from New York politicians concerned about costs, disruptions and security has the Justice Department scrambling to come up with a Plan B, even as Congress threatens to block money to pay for a criminal 9/11 trial altogether. That could force the administration to revive the very option that the President and Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. had rejected: military commissions at Guantanamo for the 9/11 plotters.
“It’s obviously proven a lot more difficult than a lot of us expected to close Guantanamo,” said Sarah E. Mendelson of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, who has studied the issue intensively. She called the turnaround of Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and other New York officials “disappointing” and the costly security plan they proposed for Manhattan excessive, given the major al-Qaeda trials held there in the past with far less disruptive procedures.
For some who have always advocated military commissions for the 9/11 plotters, the demise of the Manhattan plan simply proved their point. “It just shows what a dumb idea it was in the first place,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham in an interview on Thursday. Graham plans to reintroduce legislation in a few days to block criminal trials for the 9/11 suspects altogether.
A similar bill is already pending in the House. Two Democratic Senators, Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Jim Webb of Virginia, joined several Republican colleagues last week in coming out against criminal trials for the Qaeda plotters, raising opponents’ hopes that Congress could make the hunt for a new 9/11 courthouse moot.
“The attacks of 9/11 were acts of war, and those who planned and carried out those attacks are war criminals,” the group of six Senators wrote in a letter to the Attorney General. They said any American venue for a trial would become a terrorist target, and that military commissions were the proper way to bring terrorists to justice. — © 2010 The New York Times News Service
7) Money down the drain
There is nothing surprising about the Anglo-American decision to spend their way out of a hopeless war in Afghanistan by creating a fund to compensate defectors from the Taliban. In counter-insurgency, context is everything. Had the Taliban been on the verge of defeat on the battlefield, a few million dollars could well hasten the disintegration of its fighting formations. But given the nature of the conflict, the historical background, and the appalling scale of civilian casualties inflicted by the occupation, it is the Taliban who have been growing in strength, capability, and initiative. It is the U.S.-led coalition that is looking for a quick way out of a calamitous misadventure. Today, the binding constraint in the war against the Taliban is not the number of American troops or the lethality of their firepower but the capacity of the Afghan National Army and the willingness of Pakistan to tamp down and eliminate its ties with the extremist militias. The cash solution pushed through at the recent London conference on Afghanistan addresses neither of these constraints. Islamabad is likely to see the plan as another sign of Anglo-American desperation and as vindication of its strategy of keeping alive ‘assets’ like the Quetta shura of the Talibani and the Haqqani network leadership.
As for the Afghan National Army, its ranks already suffer from problems of low pay and morale. If extremists are now to be bought over with cash, the message it will send to army soldiers is that they chose the wrong side. This is not to say creative solutions are not needed to bring an end to the war. Dialogue and reconciliation are needed, although it is clear the Taliban leadership (and the al-Qaida elements, to the extent they are active on the ground in Afghanistan) is not interested in either. Rank-and-file fighters and even commanders are another kettle of fish but the danger is that the cash being ponied up to engineer defections might end up in the hands of the Taliban themselves. The equation would have been different had the offer of rehabilitation been made from a position of strength. There should of course be no illusion about the character of the Taliban: they remain as fundamentalist, as reactionary, and as brutal as they ever were. But as long as the U.S. and its allies wage and lead the war in Afghanistan, civilians will continue to be killed in large numbers and the Taliban support base will not erode. The occupation must end and, when that happens, there will be major consequences for the government and people of Afghanistan. But that scenario is unavoidable and must be faced sooner than later.
8) Bowling, India’s weakness
Having deservedly become the top-ranked team in Test cricket, India must address its most obvious vulnerability if it is to prolong its reign. Ian Chappell, the former Australian captain and one of cricket’s best minds, spotlighted the weakness recently when he said sides that were successful over long periods were powered by at least two champion bowlers; from studying the averages and strike-rates of India’s bowlers over the last year, he couldn’t find even one champion bowler. The last instance of an Indian bowler finishing the year (minimum qualification: five Tests) with an average in the mid-20s and a strike rate below 50 occurred in 2007, Zaheer Khan’s 41 wickets coming at a rate of 25.73 runs and 48.6 balls per dismissal. Other statistics confirm this worrying trend: in seven of India’s last nine Test series, it has conceded over 500 in an innings at least once; in three of these series India’s bowlers have been taken for over 600 at least once. Against Bangladesh, barring Zaheer’s inspired burst in the second innings of the second Test, India’s bowling laboured to shift the opponent’s lower-order.
There may be no cause for panic ahead of the series against South Africa, the world’s second-best-performing Test team. The bowlers may have struggled but India has won five successive series: evidently the side knows how to adjust. The problem does, however, expose a system that has disenfranchised the bowlers. Until such time a pitch allowing a run glut receives the same condemnation as one unfairly privileging the bowler, the bowling community will remain marginalised. India’s administrators who reacted smartly to the criticism that the national side wasn’t playing enough Test cricket must now concentrate their efforts on improving wickets across the country. Spin, traditionally an Indian strength, demands attention. Harbhajan Singh’s performance as lead spinner after the great Anil Kumble’s retirement has been patchy: he has on occasion swung matches, but is yet to command the consistency and penetration his role demands. Neither Amit Mishra nor Pragyan Ojha has made a clinching case as second spinner, but they must be allowed both time and trust. Any bowler capable of defeating high-quality batsmen in defence — as good a guideline as any for determining a potential champion wicket-taker — must be kept from slipping through the cracks in the system. Bowlers are a susceptible lot: injury and minor kinks in action can undo the endeavour of decades. They require considerate, nuanced treatment. Ian Chappell’s truth telling must be appreciated and acted upon.
9) Absence of dialogue is hurting India
Siddharth Varadarajan
The IPL fiasco shows it is impossible to maintain cordiality or rationality at the level of civil society when the government lacks the will to engage with Pakistan.
When the Angels who rule India say they favour dialogue and peace with Pakistan but then fear to tread, is it any surprise that fools would rush in to destroy that virtuous path? We will never know whether somebody from our shadowy security establishment whispered something dark and fanciful in the ears of the owners and managers of the Indian Premier League as they went in for the player auction last week and if so, for whom he was batting.
Certainly, the manner in which every Pakistani cricketer was boycotted despite the initial expression of interest by the teams smacks of considerations other than sports, business or common sense. Most of all, the decision betrays such a poor understanding of the geographies of market development, brand building and soft power that its net effect will be to undermine India’s interests in the widest possible sense.
My own view is that the boycott was not ordered or engineered by the Government of India or any of its agencies acting on instructions from the top. But that does not free our leadership from the vicarious responsibility of needlessly perpetuating a bilateral vacuum that has produced one of the most spectacular self-dismissals sub-continental cricket — and diplomacy — have ever seen.
In the face of a popular backlash across the border, the Ministry of External Affairs rightly noted that the government had nothing to do with the IPL selection. But instead of expressing regret over an outcome that it played no direct role in producing, the MEA statement threw a heap of salt on the wounded national pride of all Pakistanis. “Pakistan,” the Ministry smugly declared, “should introspect on the reasons which have put a strain on relations between India and Pakistan and adversely impacted on peace, stability and prosperity in the region.”
If anything, a little introspection on the Indian side may have been equally appropriate, since some senior Ministers — including P. Chidambaram — later went out of their way to say the exclusion of Pakistani cricketers was indeed unfortunate. Apart from reflecting badly on India, the insulting exclusion has allowed reactionary, extremist elements in Pakistan to seize the moral high ground. And it has pushed Pakistani public opinion and civil society further into the embrace of those who would like to perpetuate a climate of hostility with India and who have more than a soft spot for terrorism.
When terrorists from the Pakistan-based group, Lashkar-e-Taiba, attacked Mumbai in November 2008, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh decided not to repeat the mistake the Vajpayee government made in December 2001 of cutting off transport and people-to-people relations as part of its strategy of coercive diplomacy. Dr. Singh’s advisers knew they were dealing with a fractured polity and society across the border. They knew India needed a differentiated approach that would help isolate those elements in the Pakistani establishment with connections to jihadi organisations while strengthening those who had realised the damage state sponsorship of extremism was inflicting on Pakistan itself.
Within this framework, suspension of official dialogue was seen as a way of putting pressure on the Pakistani military and the Inter-Services Intelligence directorate, a strange conclusion given that the army and the ISI were never too hot on talks in the first place and used the resulting tension to rally the nation behind them. The civilian leadership, which managed to get a reluctant establishment to accept that Pakistani soil had indeed been used to plan 26/11, needed the limited resumption of dialogue to strengthen itself for the larger domestic battle against military dominance and jihadism. The arrest of senior LeT operatives should have occasioned some let up from India, at least by the time their trial got under way last year. But the hysterical cries of sell-out which greeted the July 2009 Sharm el-Sheikh summit stayed the Manmohan Singh government’s hand. As for civil society, New Delhi believed it would be possible to push ahead with people-to-people relations despite the freeze that had set in at the official level. Subsequent events have shown that belief to be slightly misplaced. The problem was not with the willingness of Pakistani businessmen, cricketers, artists and others to engage with India but the corrosive effect the suspension of dialogue would have on the capacity of the Indian system to use soft power to its advantage.
The IPL fiasco is one example of the negative externalities generated by the lack of official contact between the two governments. But there are others. During the India International Trade Fair in 2009, several container loads of Pakistani products got held up in lengthy customs clearance procedures. Needless to say, this petty if unscripted harassment of traders and exhibitors from across did nothing to enhance India’s national interest. This year, many Pakistani publishers and book distributors have been unable to obtain visas for the Delhi book fair.
Instead of people-to-people relations influencing official relations in a positive way, the freeze in official ties has inevitably begun to cast a chill on all forms of interaction. Businessmen, who should be looking to exploit opportunities for mutual gain, have become infected with the same hard-line pathology that our security establishment suffers from. Last year, the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry Task Force on National Security and Terrorism came up with a report so strident and hawkish that it provoked an unhelpful backlash from traders in Pakistan. Among the “hard options” the FICCI task force said India could take against Pakistan in the event of another major terrorist attack were “surgical” strikes, covert retaliation inside Pakistani territory, the blocking of imports, all-out assault and “leveraging the water issue” to pressure Pakistan.
Like nature, the relationship between the two countries abhors a vacuum. India held back the tide of dialogue in the hope that Pakistan would permanently dismantle the infrastructure of terror on its territory and a more fertile ground for bilateral progress results. The strategy might have worked up to a point but diminishing returns set in a long time ago. Today, India is acting as if the continuing suspension of dialogue is buying it security and that the resumption of dialogue would be a concession to Pakistan. In fact, dialogue is nothing other than a mechanism for advancing one’s own goals. In the hands of a skilled diplomatic establishment, dialogue, even on a range of difficult issues and disputes, can be used selectively to harvest gains. New Delhi has talked to Islamabad for decades about Kashmir without conceding an inch of territory and there is no reason to fear what might happen if talks are resumed. Especially if the same dialogue process also allows bilateral trade to increase beyond the current annual level of $2 billion and allows Indian soft power to create a wider constituency for peace and good relations in Pakistan.
It goes without saying that Pakistan needs to do more to demonstrate its willingness to crack down on extremist elements that continue to plan attacks on India. On its part, India needs to realise that engaging with Pakistan will be a more effective way of driving home that point than trading statements and insults every few weeks and refusing to sit down at the same table. A new start must immediately be made with the convening of a meeting of the two Foreign Secretaries. Neither side should stand on ceremony as far as the venue is concerned. Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram should make it a point to visit Islamabad for the Saarc Home Ministers meeting later this month and meet his Pakistani counterpart to review not just the Mumbai case but other subjects of mutual concern. The Saarc summit in Bhutan in April will provide another occasion for bilateral interaction at the Prime Ministerial level though careful preparation is needed to ensure a productive and implementable outcome. In the meantime, a moratorium on sound-bites, especially by those who are not in the loop or in synch with Prime Minister Singh’s thinking, is essential.
10) ADB to fund climate change study in Northeast Asia
The Asian Development Bank (ADB) is to carry out a comprehensive study on the economics of climate change in Northeast Asia, Manila-based ADB said in a press release on Monday.
The study’s aim is to help regional and country-level decision makers address the issue of climate change and to develop low- carbon growth strategies in their countries and the region, the ADB said. The study, Economics of Climate Change and L ow Carbon Growth Strategies in Northeast Asia, is being financed by a technical assistance grant of $1 million from ADB, and $800,000 of grant from the Government of the Republic of Korea. It will cover four countries — China, Japan, Republic of Korea and Mongolia. “The purpose of this assistance is to raise awareness about the urgency of climate change challenges in the region,” said Tae Yong Jung, study team leader and Senior Climate Change Specialist in ADB’s East Asia Department.
The study will provide the region’s policymakers with the latest information on mitigation and adaptation strategies, and suggest policy responses to cope with and counter future climate change impacts. — Xinhua
Corrections and Clarifications
• In “One month after Copenhagen” (Editorial, January 30, 2010), a sentence in the first paragraph was “Minister of State for Environment and Forests Jairam Ramesh gave a comprehensive reply, stating clearly the red times in India’s negotiating position.” It should have been “red lines”.
In the fourth paragraph, the last sentence was “These numbers have to be compared with the necessity of the developed countries to reduce emissions by 80 per cent by 2050, if the global temperature rise is to be restricted to 20 degrees C.” And in the seventh paragraph, a sentence was “The accord stated there should be an upper limit of 20 degrees C for rise in global temperature by 2050.” In both instances, “20 degrees C” should have been “2 degrees C”.
• In a Mumbai report “Two killed in drunk driving” (January 31, 2010), a sentence in the ninth paragraph was “An offence under the Indian Penal Code Sections 304 (for culpable homicide not amounting to murder), 297 (for rash driving) ... has been registered against Ms. Haveliwala.” It should have been Section 279 (for rash driving). (Section 297 deals with a different subject.)
11) The Generals and their labyrinth
The image of the Indian Army has been badly dented with a section of its top brass implicated in what has come to be known as the Sukhna land scam. The damage could have been mitigated had there been a clear signal from the Army that it was prepared to deal seriously with the alleged misconduct. Regrettably, the controversy was allowed to linger and was exacerbated by perceptions that the Army Chief, General Deepak Kapoor, was reluctant to act firmly against his aide and Military Secretary, Lt. General Avadhesh Prakash. Despite an Army Court of Inquiry (CoI) reportedly citing prima facie evidence to the effect that Lt. General Prakash was the key figure in the Sukhna land case, General Kapoor was in favour of milder administrative action rather than a court martial. The change of heart, which came a couple of days before Lt-General Prakash’s retirement on January 31, owes wholly to the very proper intervention of Defence Minister A.K. Antony, a politician respected across the political spectrum for his probity in public life. It was Mr. Antony’s ‘advice’ that the case should be dealt with sternly that persuaded the Army Chief to court martial Lt. General Prakash. Earlier, as recommended by the CoI, General Kapoor approved a court martial for Lt. General P.K. Rath and administrative action against two others; the sticking point was over his aide and Military Secretary.
The four generals are entitled to a fair process, which only a military court can provide under the procedure established by law. But it is important to send a signal that any scent of corruption in the armed forces will be dealt with firmly and without prevarication, even when it involves the top brass. The case itself relates to the issue of a no-objection certificate (NOC) to a realtor, who falsely claimed to be an affiliate of Mayo College, for setting up a school on private land adjacent to the Sukhna military station in Darjeeling district. Among the issues that need to be determined are whether rules and procedures were bent in granting the NOC and if there were security implications in doing so, given the area’s proximity to the border. The Indian Army, which was regarded as an incorruptible institution in the first few decades following Independence, has been affected by a string of corruption scandals in recent times. The only way to check the downslide is to have a policy of zero tolerance of corruption, something that Mr. Antony has stressed more than once. Apart from the moral and economic implications, corruption in the armed forces has a quite obvious bearing on security. It is a risk India can ill afford to take.
12) Doctors for the villages
While a country like China devised practical ways to deliver healthcare to rural populations by deploying its band of ‘barefoot doctors’ from the 1960s in a transitional phase, and then went on to expand full-fledged medical education facilities that enabled national coverage to a great degree, chronic shortages of doctors in rural India six decades after Independence remain a worry. The allopathic doctor-patient ratio is a dismal 1:1,722. Nevertheless, the Med ical Council of India’s proposal for a three-and-a-half-year course leading to a diploma in Bachelor of Rural Medicine and Surgery (BRMS) to produce a class of allopathic practitioners who hail from rural areas and will serve in notified rural areas may turn out to be a cure worse than the disease. Chhattisgarh’s experiment with a controversial three-year medical course (introduced in 2000 and scrapped in 2004) should provide a cautionary tale. The key question is: should rural folk be short-changed when it comes to the education, training, and calibre of medical practitioners?
The Bhore Committee Report of 1946 provided a highly commended blueprint for a modern public health delivery system and the training of personnel. It envisaged the concept of a ‘basic’ doctor who would be central to the delivery of primary healthcare; he or she would be put through five-and-a-half years of sound medical education. An alternative cadre of Licentiates (LMPs) who underwent a three-to-four-year course in medical schools was abolished after deliberation. But the Committee recommended the setting up of more medical colleges, with all available resources directed at the production of one type of doctor with the optimal level of training over five-and-a-half-years. The expectation was that medical education would match population growth and expanding healthcare needs. The number of MBBS seats in India is less than 31,000 today which is far from adequate. There were 17,654 medical degree-holders available at the time of the Bhore Committee survey to serve a population that was less than a third of what it is today and they were less spread out. The challenge before the government is straightforward: it is to increase the MBBS-level intake manifold, rationalising the process of setting up medical colleges — and cleansing the clearance system of multi-point transactional corruption. A package of well-considered and sustainable measures, including attractive incentives, to ensure that a significantly greater number of doctors work in the countryside, must be put in place. Narrow-minded resistance from within the medical fraternity should not be allowed to stand in the way.
13) The working of the reset policy
Vladimir Radyuhin
Notwithstanding the “reset” of the U.S.-Russia ties, the Obama administration is still committed to the policy of containment of Russia.
A year after the new United States administration promised to “press the reset button” on ties with Russia, the two nations have reversed the dangerous slide towards confrontation, but are yet to bring about a real turnaround in bilateral relations that are plagued by a gruesome lack of trust.
Cooperation on Afghanistan is the most tangible product of the “reset.” Last year, Russia opened transit corridors for the U.S. and other NATO supplies to their forces in Afghanistan across its territory and airspace. It agreed last month to expand cooperation, offering to service Soviet-built helicopters, train more Afghan security personnel and restore scores of Soviet-built industrial and infrastructure facilities in Afghanistan.
However, Russia, prime victim of “narco-aggression” from Afghanistan, deeply resents U.S. reluctance to combat drugs production, which has grown more than 40 times since the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) entered the country.
In another sign of the “reset” working, Russia and the U.S. — the two most powerful nuclear states — are close to signing a new nuclear arms reduction treaty to replace the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START). Here, again, the differences over drafting the new pact may hamper further improvement in bilateral ties.
Moscow and Washington missed the December 5 deadline to seal the arms pact before the START expired, as the talks stumbled over the U.S. plans to build global missile defences. President Barack Obama’s decision to scrap his predecessor, George W. Bush’s plans to deploy missile interceptors in Eastern Europe has not allayed Russia’s concern that a global missile shield the U.S. is still committed to will upset the strategic weapons balance by undermining Russia’s capability to retaliate against a U.S. first strike.
Under Mr. Obama’s modified plan, the Pentagon would initially deploy sea-based light interceptors in the Mediterranean targeting Iran’s short and medium-range ballistic missiles. However, the new plan calls for the system to evolve for defence against intercontinental ballistic missiles by the end of the decade. Moreover, U.S. missile defences may be deployed in the Baltic Sea and in Eastern Europe. Thus, instead of the 10 missile interceptors Mr. Bush planned to set up in Poland by 2012, Russia may have dozens of more sophisticated and dangerous anti-missiles on its doorstep by 2020.
Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said the U.S. could dispel Russian fears by making a commitment in the post-START treaty to share information on missile defence. This would be in line with a memorandum of understanding signed during Mr. Obama’s visit to Russia in June 2009 when the U.S. agreed to establish a relationship between missile offence and defence in the new pact.
Washington has, however, refused. State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said “the START follow-on agreement is not the appropriate vehicle” for addressing missile defences. The Americans are essentially saying: let’s first cut offensive nuclear arsenals and then discuss missile defences. The Russians have few reasons to trust the U.S. word given a history of broken promises not to expand NATO eastward or to get the new NATO members in Eastern Europe sign the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) treaty, and — more recently — false assurances that U.S. weapons delivered to Georgia would not be used offensively.
Notwithstanding the problems, both sides have vowed to sign the post-START treaty in coming weeks. But the Republican Senate election victory in Massachusetts last month has clouded the prospects of its ratification. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has stipulated that both sides must ratify the new pact simultaneously. Even assuming that the ratification process goes through smoothly, the new nuclear arms reduction treaty will not be enough to reload Russian-American relations.
“START is not a big achievement. It will regulate adversarial relations but on its own it will not bring U.S.-Russia relations to a new level,” said Dmitry Trenin, leading Russian expert on strategic affairs. He feels that to jump-start their partnership, Russia and the U.S. should jointly build a global missile defence.
Moscow has repeatedly made such proposals to Washington since the early 2000s — and updated them last year. However, according to Russian General Staff chief Nikolai Makarov, “the Americans at this stage do not agree to build a joint global missile defence.”
There has been little progress in other areas of bilateral relations outlined in the road map the Presidents adopted during their summit in Moscow last July. The Obama administration is yet to resubmit to Congress a 123 civilian nuclear cooperation agreement the Bush administration signed with Russia in May 2008 but was put on the back burner after the Russian-Georgian war.
Despite Mr. Obama’s promise, the White House has made no move to get Congress to repeal the 1974 Jackson-Vanik amendment that denied normal trade benefits to the Soviet Union until it allowed its Jews to freely immigrate to Israel. The U.S. continues to stall Russia’s bid to join the World Trade Organisation. Russia’s First Deputy Prime Minister Igor Shuvalov last week reported to Mr. Putin that the U.S. was the main obstacle to Russian accession and that it showed no interest in settling the differences.
The past year showed that notwithstanding the “reset,” the Obama administration is still committed to the policy of containment of Russia. Four months after U.S. Vice-President Joe Biden announced the “reset” policy at a security conference in Munich, he visited Ukraine and Georgia to demonstrate support for the leaders of the “colour revolutions” and their NATO aspirations. During a high-profile tour of Eastern Europe in October, Mr. Biden announced “not negotiable” principles in relations with Russia: the U.S. “will not tolerate” any “spheres of influence,” and Russia’s “veto power” on the eastward expansion of NATO. He reiterated Washington’s commitment to the policy of regime change on the Russian periphery, asking East Europe to help the U.S. “guide” former Soviet states to democracy. The U.S. has moved to re-arm and train the Georgian army in the face of explicit Russian concerns that Georgia may be planning a new war to avenge its defeat in 2008.
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton last week asserted the same principles in a keynote address at Ecole Militaire in France. She went a step further, rejecting Mr. Medvedev’s proposal to negotiate a new security pact for Europe, which Moscow sees as a litmus test of the West’s readiness to accept the principle of equal and indivisible security on the continent.
A few days earlier, Poland announced that the U.S. would deploy Patriot missile on its territory, less than 70 km from the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad on the Baltic Sea. Warsaw and Washington agreed on the deployment after Russia threatened to station Iskander ballistic missiles in Kaliningrad in response to the stationing of U.S. interceptor missiles in Poland. Now that Mr. Obama has scrapped the missile deployment in Poland and Russia withdrew its Iskander threat, the U.S. decision to go ahead with the Patriot is seen in Moscow as a patently hostile move. The Russian military promised to beef up its defences in the region.
It is of little surprise, therefore, that Russian analysts take an increasingly pessimistic view of the prospects for the “reset.” Sergey Rogov, director of Russia’s top think-tank, the Institute of the United States and Canada, describes the “reset” as merely “political rhetoric” and “more of a slogan that changed the atmosphere in Russian-U.S. relations” but “has not yet become a well thought-out strategy.”
Other experts suggest that the Obama team invented the “reset” concept to win Russia’s cooperation on two top foreign policy priorities — Afghanistan and Iran. On Afghanistan, Russia has gone along with the U.S. because it has a vital stake in countering the threat of terrorism and narcotics from that country. However, Moscow has refused to subscribe to Washington’s bully policy on Iran, casting itself in the role of an intermediary between Iran and the West and declining to fold up nuclear energy and defence cooperation with Tehran.
“There is a view that the American ‘reset’ is mostly a PR smokescreen,” and “part of a wider PR process to improve U.S. influence in the world,” says analyst Vladimir Belaeff of the U.S. Global Society Institute.
When Ms Clinton presented Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov with a red reset button last year, she goofed up on the Russian translation for “reset.” The symbolic gift had the word peregruzka (overcharge) printed on it instead of perezagruzka (reset). The next day, Russian daily Kommersant ran a front-page headline: “Sergei Lavrov and Hillary Clinton push the wrong button.”
14) Questions of judicial access
V.R. Krishna Iyer
Is it the Supreme Court of India, or the Supreme Court for Indians?
________________________________________
• The law must be equally open to the humblest, simplest and little member of the community
• A decentralised system of judicature is a paramount property for democracy to have élan
________________________________________
A Supreme Court of India, and a Supreme Court for all Indians: these two versions can be radically different in terms of principle and content. The Preamble to the Constitution has pledged the people of India to justice — social, economic, cultural — and political India with a geopolitical concept. Indians represent a humanist-socio-economic idea, a collective value.
A billion and more of Indians have a unique cultural legacy. Their noble thoughts can transcend mere space, terrain and land, and they are politically united by a notion of nationalism. One is dynamic and dialectical, the other is bare ground and air that provide them their habitat. Indians are proud to be a united people. But earth and ocean have no life unless human beings enliven them. Institutions are meant to serve life and its development.
If democracy is for the people, the Supreme Court should function where the litigants need it most, not where the British for their imperial reasons chose to locate it. It was for historical and geographic-strategic grounds that Delhi was chosen as the national capital. Delhi has no other claim to be the capital seat of the judiciary as well. For military and administrative purposes, a united India found Delhi to be the most suitable. But after Partition, Delhi itself remains vulnerable as a target before Pakistan. Delhi has no special advantage in cultural, geographic, political or social terms to be the centre of the country’s judicial administration.
‘For the People’ is a democratic and logical desideratum. Then the courts should be where the litigants are in large numbers, where their access is best facilitated. In this large country, Delhi is but a corner, while the people live mostly to the south, east and west.
The different factors may be studied by a Commission such as the Law Commission, which has come to the reasoned conclusion that there must be four benches of the Supreme Court. The south feels dominated by the north owing to the location of the Supreme Court. Is justice being alienated by distance, culture and language from the north? When the Supreme Court has authority over the rule of the whole nation, this insular judicial imperialism will be a divisive force. This should be avoided at all costs. Decentralisation based on geography, history and social factors is an imperative need.
The glory of India in its undivided status and stature is not dependent on a single court but on its pragmatic diversity. So these are profound considerations behind the demand for Benches of the Supreme Court outside Delhi. Why did Pakistan as a nation become powerful only on religious criteria? Why did East Bengal separate from Pakistan and become a separate sovereign state? Language and culture are good lessons for the people to keep Bharat as one entity. Let us have Benches on federal considerations, promoting unity in diversity.
In a vast country of diversity, demographic immensity, logistic difficulty and large-scale indigence, democracy makes decentralisation an imperative of administration. Access to justice also implies early finality coming within the reach of the rich and the poor. These considerations persuaded Uttar Pradesh, the State that has one of the direst situations in terms of poverty and has one of the largest chunks of population among the States, to attempt some moderate reform in the field of revision to the High Court in litigation involving financial stakes below a certain level.
Up until now, judicial reform has been a tinkering exercise, not an engineering project. But even that little tinkering is fiercely challenged as litigative anathema by the legal profession. This is unfortunate. Decentralisation has a paramount desideratum if access for the people to judicial institutions has to become a reality. This fact compelled various States in India, even native princedoms, to adopt the strategy of having benches. It has worked well to enable the aggrieved poor to reach the courts and seek remedies. The same reasoning justifies the need for benches of the Supreme Court if that magnificent institution is to fulfil its fundamental mission of being a court for the people and of the people. It was this principle that persuaded the Law Commission to recommend four benches for this large country.
The Law Commission has pointed out how huge sums of money are wasted by a single court situated in one corner of the country, which is final and infallible. The litigant sells all he has to reach Delhi and pay fabulous fees to hire lawyers, only to find that by afternoon the case stands postponed. The expense already incurred goes down the drain. Air travel is expensive, hotel costs are horrendous, lawyers charge high fees, and arguments with leisurely judges take too many days. On the whole, going to the law is like going to Banaras or Mecca: a will and testament has to be written out because litigation often lasts beyond your life-time. Astrologers alone can hope to anticipate its fate.
The Law Commission recommended that four Cassation Benches be set up in the Northern region/zone in Delhi, the Southern region/zone in Chennai/Hyderabad, the Eastern region/zone in Kolkata and the Western region/zone in Mumbai, to deal with all appellate work arising out of the orders/judgments of the High Courts of the particular region. It also suggested that if it is found that Article 130 of the Constitution cannot be stretched to make it possible to implement this recommendation, Parliament should enact a suitable legislation or constitutional amendment for the purpose.
The rule of law must govern the rule of life, and if life is to be humanist, compassionate and accessible to the lowliest, the law must be equally open to the humblest, simplest and little member of the community.
Judicial justice is precious to a people. The adversarial system of justice to be successful has to have the Bar as an integral part of the system of judicial administration. The Bench and the Bar together operate to dispense competent and sound justice. Justice is the salt of the earth and if the salt loses its savour, wherewith shall they be salted?
The excellence of justice, the refined process of justice and justicing, make humanity happy, harmonious and a haven for peaceful and progressive habitation. Access is negated where the system is expensive; the social philosophy of the judges and the lawyers are with the proprietariat, and the poor are priced out of an archaic system whose doors open only to the opulent, not to the indigent. Dialectical materialism is the reality in the temporal world, and where purchase of able argument from the Bar is beyond the purse of the litigant, he or she is de facto denied justice.
Economic democracy in the administration of justice commands a system where courts and tribunals are easy to reach, inexpensive to tap and facilitate finality of verdict. These fundamental features compel a democratic system of justice to be successful by means of decentralisation. Without this, the people cease to be the beneficiaries of democracy or have a voice in the state process. This applies all the more in the case of justice because justice is based on law and law in a complex society in a modern democracy is too complicated for the laity.
The Indian legal system is altogether beyond the common people. It is so esoteric that it remains alien and unintelligible to a society that is largely illiterate —without the aid of the Bar, which has a professional monopoly over jurisprudence. If the court has too many tiers and the highest court is too distant from the regions where the proletariat live and struggle for its existence, the right to justice which is the quintessence of democracy loses its spiritual value and cipherises the other fundamental rights.
The inevitable conclusion is that a decentralised system of judicature is a paramount property for democracy to have élan. A vibrant democracy must have a circuit system of administration of justice. Alternatively, Benches in different parts of the country will make the court accessible to all. Justice must be available so that social justice may become a reality.
The Bench and the Bar must be easy of access if economic democracy is not to be a travesty. If political justice is so costly that it is available only to the rich, the laws will grind the poor and the rich will rule the law.
15) Zardari may weather NRO crisis, but political instability continues
Nirupama Subramanian
The situation is now ripe for a clash between the executive and the judiciary.
— PHOTO: AP
ASIF ALI ZARDARI: A big political advantage he enjoys is Nawaz Sharif’s apparent reluctance to use the NRO issue.
Despite persistent speculation of an imminent downfall, President Asif Ali Zardari and his Pakistan People’s Party government are trying to politically wear down the storm from the Supreme Court’s verdict on the infamous National Reconciliation Ordinance and may yet manage to ride it out.
Mr. Zardari has made it clear that just the moral pressure of the December 16 verdict, which struck down the Musharraf-era NRO and ordered the reopening of thousands of corruption cases including those against him, cannot force him to step down from office. As for prosecution, he has made it known that the constitution insulates him from the verdict with the immunity it gives to his office.
In recent weeks, he has undertaken extensive tours of the Sindh and Punjab provinces, interacting with party workers, lashing out his opponents in speeches and generally trying to dispel the criticism that he had hidden himself in his “bunker” in the presidential palace.
His political position has been bolstered by the support he has received from Prime Minister Syed Yousaf Raza Gilani.
Zardari opponents who had pinned their hopes on a Gilani-led rebellion within the PPP are slowly realising that the Prime Minister is not prepared to play such a role. In fact, the political uncertainty seems to have only nudged the two together and the tensions between them of a few months ago are no longer that apparent.
Mr. Gilani has come out strongly in support of the PPP leader. Speaking in the National Assembly last week, he made it clear that the government would not reopen any case against Mr. Zardari as long as the Constitution provided him protection from prosecution, and in thinly veiled words, warned the judiciary of the limits to its domain.
“The government is ready for reopening of Swiss cases but the president enjoys immunity granted by the Parliament. It is only Parliament that can withdraw this immunity, and if this is done, I am ready to take action. Nobody else can rewrite the Constitution as this is the sovereign right of Parliament,” Mr. Gilani told the parliament.
Although the Supreme Court judgment did not mention Mr. Zardari by name, it made explicit mention of cases in the Swiss courts in which he was involved before they were terminated under the NRO, ordering the government to get the Swiss authorities to reopen these cases.
The detailed judgment, released in January, says Pakistan could learn from the experience of the Philippines and Nigeria in the matter of retrieving the ill-gotten wealth of rulers from foreign shores.
As the judgment made no reference to presidential immunity, this was seen as an opening for legal challenges to Article 248, the constitutional clause that provides him protection from prosecution.
Mr. Gilani challenged the judiciary to interpret the immunity clause, thus throwing the ball back in the Supreme Court.
If the main opposition party, the Pakistan Muslim League (N), and some political commentators are to be believed, the situation is now ripe for a clash between the executive and the judiciary, which in turn could pose a threat to Pakistan’s two-year-old democracy.
A “clash of institutions” is also seen in a tussle over judicial appointments after Mr. Zardari turned down Mr. Chaudhary’s recommendations for elevation of some judges to the apex court.
But there is a growing sentiment that the judiciary could be overplaying its hand. If anything, the controversy over the appointments, in which both case law and precedent seem to be on Mr. Zardari’s side, has taken a bit of the shine off the judiciary.
Even prominent lawyers who backed the chief justice’s struggle against his removal by the previous ruler, General Pervez Musharraf, and fought for his reappointment, are questioning Mr. Chaudhary’s motives in the controversy over the appointments.
The NRO judgement too has its critics. The eminent human rights lawyer, Asma Jehangir, has questioned the sagacity and motives of the judges in invoking in the verdict constitutional clauses introduced by General Zia-ul-Haq, never used, about the Islamic morality of holders of public office.
In a sign that the judges sense a weak wicket and could be backing off, Chief Justice Chaudhary has declared that the judiciary did not want confrontation with the executive. During a hearing on a matter to do with promotions of civil servants, the chief justice made the pointed remark that the judiciary was there to protect parliament and the democratic system.
But how far the judiciary is prepared to go will become clearer in the coming days when it will be called to decide on whether Mr. Zardari is a good Muslim — something it has already held to be undeterminable in a previous judgment —and on the nature and scope of his immunity. It must also decide what to do with a review petition filed by the government on the NRO verdict.
Also this week, the chief election commissioner will take up a petition asking if Mr. Zardari was ever convicted in any case at home or abroad. There is some confusion about this, and if he was, it could raise questions about his candidature in the 2008 presidential elections, now that the NRO has been pronounced as non est, or “never having existed.”
While there is no let-up from the anti-Zardari camp, a big political advantage he enjoys at the moment is PML(N) leader Nawaz Sharif’s apparent reluctance, despite the high-decibel grandstanding by some members of his party, to use the NRO issue for an all-out battle against Mr. Zardari.
Statements from him suggest that having suffered at the hands of a military usurper, he would do nothing to destabilise the existing set-up, as it could only benefit non-democratic forces, and hurt his own long-term interests. Mr Sharif mainly wants the PPP leader to give up certain powers that he inherited from the Musharraf presidency, and the lifting of the two-term limit for Prime Ministers, something of direct importance to him. There are indications that Mr. Zardari may be prepared to arrive at some compromise on this, even if he does it just to continue in office.
Much will also depend on how the Pakistan Army chooses to play its cards. Some Zardari opponents are asking it to play a role by pressuring the government to implement the NRO verdict against Mr. Zardari. Much as it loathes the PPP leader, the Army is still retrieving its image from the legacy of disrepute and unpopularity of the Musharraf years, and may not want to take political centre-stage any time soon. It is also preoccupied with operations in the north-west frontier region and tribal areas, and in fending off American pressures to carry out more such operations.
But an important date lies ahead — the expiry of General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani’s term as Army chief in November this year. The government has to soon start applying its mind to this issue. As of now, the power to appoint a successor rests with President Zardari. It is not clear if General Kayani wants an extension, or not. Even if Mr. Zardari succeeds in weathering the present crisis, it is this that may turn out to his real minefield.
16) Can the idea of India pass the Thackeray test?
Siddharth Varadarajan
The Centre and the Maharashtra government must make it clear to the Shiv Sena that they will not be allowed to threaten Shah Rukh Khan with violence.
— PHOTO: AFP
SHAH RUKH KHAN: A cultural icon and a face that the whole world identifies as Indian.
Now that he has come up with a radical plan for overhauling the country’s capacity to deal with terrorism and other threats to its national security, P. Chidambaram must turn his attention to a problem that none of his predecessors in the Union Home Ministry ever had the courage to deal with: putting goondas in their place.
The task is urgent and brooks no delay. After sparring with Shah Rukh Khan for several days over the Bollywood actor’s statement regretting the absence of Pakistani players in the forthcoming IPL cricket tournament and declaring that Mumbai belongs to all Indians and not just Maharashtrians, the Shiv Sena has now come up with an ultimatum: Mr. Khan must apologise or else the party will not allow his films to be shown in the city, India’s commercial capital.
For me, this contest is as nerve-wracking and stomach churning as any the IPL could throw up. Will this political tournament end with the jailing and prosecution of the Shiv Sena’s leaders and goons who are conspiring to vandalise cinema halls and beat up those who defy this ban? Or will it end with the desolate spectacle of an isolated Shah Rukh being forced to surrender before the ridiculous diktat of the Shiv Sainiks — the way dozens of artists, actors, musicians and politicians have done over the past two decades in the face of the cowardice of policemen, ministers and judges who refused to defend the rule of law?
Well placed to influence
As Union Home Minister, Mr. Chidambaram may lack direct authority to ensure either outcome in Mumbai. But with Maharashtra ruled by the Congress in alliance with the Nationalist Congress Party, he is certainly well placed to influence what happens next. Asked last week by reporters for his opinion about the exclusion of the Pakistani cricketers by the IPL, the minister echoed Shah Rukh Khan in saying it was a “disservice to cricket that some of these players were not picked.” As for the status of Mumbai, Mr. Chidambaram described the ‘Maharashtrians only’ thesis of the Shiv Sena and Maharashtra Navnirman Sena as “pernicious.”
In the face of the Shiv Sena’s latest ultimatum, delivered by no less a person than Manohar Joshi, Mr. Chidambaram should remind the former Speaker of the Lok Sabha about the rights the Indian Constitution guarantees its citizens. And he should publicly declare that not only will the Shiv Sena’s goondas and leaders be prevented from disrupting the screening of ‘My Name is Khan’ in Mumbai but that he himself intends to be present at the film’s first screening in the city.
A price Shiv Sena must pay
The Shiv Sena may be a recognised political party with an electoral presence at the state and central level but there is a price it must pay for being part of a democratic system. That price is fidelity to the rule of law and the principle of equality that is a basic feature of the Indian Constitution. For years, this party and its leader, Bal Thackeray, have tested the limits of the law by threatening and often actually unleashing violence on political opponents, trades unionists, religious and linguistic minorities and cultural personalities. Each time, the Indian system has proved too weak to defend the law.
When confronted by the mob power of the Shiv Sena, MNS or other right-wing groups, the police in India invariably give in to their demands, no matter how irrational or unreasonable, and force the targets of their illegal pressure to give up their rights. So art galleries anywhere in India think once, twice and a hundred times before exhibiting a single painting by M.F. Hussain, movie hall owners agonise over whether to show ‘controversial’ films or not, screenplay writers and movie directors allow politicians, pundits, granthis and maulvis to vet their projects before they are launched, scholarly works of history are banned because their contents do not conform with the cherished hagiography of some group or sect, writers like Taslima Nasrin are hounded out of the country by mobs who claim to have been offended by books they have never read, shops fear to stock Valentine cards because of threats by self-appointed guardians of morality and ‘Indian culture’.
The intolerance of the Shiv Sena (and now the MNS) may be the most virulent and violent but it is symptomatic of a sickness that has spread to every corner of the country. Shah Rukh Khan is a cultural icon, a face that the whole world identifies as Indian. If the Shiv Sena is able to silence him or make him take back his words by threatening violence, we might as well pack up and throw away the idea of India as a land where democracy and culture flourish. So how is this contest going to end? When confronted by mobs, each and every one of his predecessors in the Home Ministry chose the path of least resistance. Mr. Chidambaram cannot afford to fail the Thackeray test.
17) Over 4 million people in need of food assistance in southern Sudan: U.N.
The number of people in southern Sudan in need of food assistance has more than quadrupled from almost one million in 2009 to 4.3 million this year because of conflict and drought, the U.N. food agency said on Tuesday.
WFP said in a statement issued in Nairobi that the agency was pre-positioning 50,000 metric tons of sorghum, pulses and vegetable oil to feed the millions who may be cut off when the rains start. “This spike in the number of hungry people in so uthern Sudan comes just ahead of the rainy season when roads become blocked and communities are cut off from food assistance,” WFP Sudan Coordinator in the south Leo van der Velden said.
WFP plans to assist the hungry for between two and eight months in 2010, depending on how heavy the rainy season is, and the extent of food around in local markets. The aim is to ensure that families have access to sufficient food before the next harvest is due in October and November. WFP will also support school meal programmes for more than 400, 000 schoolchildren and provide food for tens of thousands of conflict-affected families, returnees and refugees. The southern Sudan Agriculture Minister, Samson Kwaje, said Jonglei State has the highest number in need of food assistance. “Internal conflict and incursions from the Lord’s Resistance Army together with drought have made almost half the population of the South short of food,” he said.
The annual food needs and livelihood assessment was made by a team of 145 trained data collectors who fanned out across southern Sudan, collecting information from more than 2,000 households about what people eat, where they get their food from, and how they cope. The assessment covered Eastern Equatoria, Jonglei, Northern Bahr el Ghazal, Lakes, Upper Nile, Western Bahr el Ghazal and Warrap — seven of the 10 states in southern Sudan.
Conflict in 2009 killed 2,500 people and displaced 350,000 people from their homes in southern Sudan while drought slashed harvests so WFP started shifting from recovery and rebuilding to a more emergency-focused response from June 2009. WFP has a current total shortfall of $485.4 m to provide food assistance in 2010 to some 11 million people in need of food assistance across all of Sudan. — Xinhua
18) A new kind of discordance
The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s running battle with the Shiv Sena on the ‘Marathi manoos’ issue underlines the predicament of an organisation that is wedded in equal measure to Hindi and Hindutva. The Sangh Parivar’s formative years resounded to the rousing cry of ‘Hindi, Hindu, Hindustan.’ The slogan pretty much defined the Jan Sangh. The Bharatiya Janata Party, despite outwardly embracing the South, remains fixated to this day on Hindi. It stands to reason then that the Parivar and its political ward cannot countenance the Shiv Sena’s brand of virulent Marathi chauvinism. In a way, the BJP is being paid back in its own coin. The Sena’s opposition to North Indians is rooted in the same exclusivist ideology that informs the Parivar’s overall vision. In and out of power, the BJP has unabashedly pursued a policy of “anti-minorityism.” The party posited this in terms of “justice for all and appeasement of none” but on the ground the anthem invariably translated into aggression against minorities. From Gujarat 2002 to Orissa 2008-2009, the country has been witness to a pattern of violence against minorities whose primary driver was the thought process that motivated the Parivar rank-and-file. Having promoted a “Hindi-Hindu” culture, the BJP today can hardly quarrel with the Sena for targeting one section of Indians. To be fair to the BJP, it never treated its own Hindi fetish as licence to attack non-Hindi speakers. But the party did not protest either when its oldest partner repeatedly set upon innocent migrants from other parts of India.
So why have the RSS and the BJP suddenly woken up to the dangers of Marathi chauvinism? In recent statements, both organisations have unequivocally denounced the divisive nature of the ‘Marathi manoos’ project. Clearly, the urgency derives from the BJP’s growing problems with the Bihar-based Janata Dal (United). The National Democratic Alliance is today a shadow of its former self. Ahead of the 2009 general election, the alliance between the BJP and its largest coalition partner, Nitish Kumar-led JD(U), came under severe strain. Over the past two years, the JD(U) has expressed unease over the BJP’s “communalism” but positively bristled at its quiescence when Bihari migrants were attacked in Maharashtra. The Hindutva party knows that Mr. Kumar has many options outside the BJP whereas the Sena, beleaguered by the emergence of the rival Maharashtra Navnirman Sena, has none. From the BJP perspective, it makes sense to placate the JD(U) and wait for tempers to cool in Maharashtra. As for the Congress, its evident glee at the state of affairs between the BJP and the Sena is premature given its own share of problems with the Nationalist Congress Party.
19) Rebound continues
The recently released trade data for December 2009 reveal two significant developments in India’s foreign trade. First, the turnaround in exports has sustained for the second month. Exports grew by 9.3 per cent, from $13.38 billion in December 2008 to $14.61 billion. The improvement is particularly encouraging as it has come on top of the 18 per cent-plus growth recorded in November reversing the downtrend witnessed over a period of 13 months. The second development is that the trend in imports too has turned positive. After an 11-month slump, imports grew by 27.2 per cent to $24.75 billion from $19.46 billion a year ago. It is perhaps no coincidence that the pick up in India’s foreign trade, both exports and imports, has come at a time when the global recession is abating. The principal markets for India’s exports are the United States, the European Union, and Japan. Although these markets are recovering from the recession, economic growth continues to be sluggish and fragile. The policy-makers have been repeatedly urging exporters to diversify their markets. Indeed, such market diversification is a major plank of the Foreign Trade Policy, the targets being the newer, unconventional markets in Asia, Latin America, and Africa. Such advice is especially valid now in the continuing quest for greater stability in exports.
The growth in imports is a positive sign. Manufacturing has been growing in double digits. Lower non-oil imports in the past indicated lower investment demand in capital goods. The more robust trade figures of November and December correlate with the stronger macroeconomic performance. All major institutions have been marking up their forecasts of India’s GDP growth for 2009-10. However, it would be unwise to ignore the ramifications of the global recession on foreign trade. To a large extent, the recent trade figures look good because of the base effect: world trade contracted sharply from October 2008. Over a nine-month period, April-December 2009, both exports and imports have grown at a lower rate than during the corresponding period in 2008. Despite the recent bounce back, exports are likely to be well below last year’s levels. The overall trade deficit for the nine months has shrunk by more than 28 per cent and now stands at $76.24 billion. Oil prices were generally benign until December when they started firming up. A lower trade deficit is not necessarily a positive feature when it indicates lower economic activity. World crude prices represent another imponderable and could well upset the calculations on the foreign trade front.
20) The audacity of Afghan peace hopes
M.K. Bhadrakumar
The London conference on the Afghan problem certainly gives grounds for optimism.
Last Thursday the region took a ride in the raft of optimism to peace. The London conference on the Afghan problem certainly gives grounds for optimism. From the Indian perspective, however, what matters most is to be able to behold just in time that, as the Old Testament says, “there ariseth a little cloud out of the sea, like a man’s hand.” The little cloud is destined to rise higher and higher and become larger and larger with astonishing celerity and will burst in a deluge of rain on the parched earth. And like Elijah hastening Ahab home, India needs to head for the chariot and “get thee down that the rain stop thee not.” For, once the river Kishon gets swollen from the deep layer of dust in the arid plain being turned into thick mud that impedes the wheels, it becomes impassable.
The fact of the matter is that the decisions of the London conference not only constitute a 5-year road map for conflict resolution in Afghanistan but are destined to impact on regional security and stability for a long time to come. The decisions run on four different but inter-connected templates. First and foremost, what seemed to some a heretic idea until recently has come to habitate the centerpiece of the political agenda, namely, that the war needs to be brought to an end by “reintegrating” and “reconciling” the Taliban in the Afghan national mainstream. Second, whatever residual war effort remains will focus on persuading or coercing the Taliban to negotiate. Third, the so-called “Afghanisation” process will be speeded up so that by July next year the drawdown of American forces in Afghanistan can commence. Fourth, enduring peace in the Hindu Kush can be attained only in a regional environment in which Afghanistan’s neighbours cooperate by setting aside their competing rivalries and by resolving their outstanding disputes.
Clearly, to use the U.S. Defence Secretary’s words, the Taliban now form part of Afghanistan’s “political fabric”. On the eve of the London conference, the United Nations Security Council removed the names of five Taliban leaders from the “black list” of 144 dangerous terrorists figuring in the sanctions regime under Resolution 1267 dating back to the immediate aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks on New York and Washington. Admittedly, the wheel has come full circle. As the U.N. envoy to Afghanistan put it, “If you want results, then you have to talk to the relevant person in authority. I think the time has come to do it.”
For the Pakistan-hating, China-bashing veterans of our strategic community, all this must have come as a stunning bolt from the blue. But they are only at fault. The Indian strategic thinkers should not have been such incorrigible fundamentalists to fail to appreciate the shades of political Islam or discern the western propaganda about the Taliban. Mixing up the Taliban completely with the adversarial mindset of the Pakistani security agencies was equally wrong. Overlooking the indigenous roots of a homegrown movement was always injudicious. The triumphalism over Taliban’s ouster in 2001 was unwarranted, as it was never in doubt that such a grassroots movement cannot be expected to simply fade away in the Afghan-Pakistani political landscape; a return of the native was inevitable. Lastly, the U.S. intervention in 2001 was quintessentially a contrived revenge act on the part of the George W. Bush administration precipitated by a cataclysmic backdrop unparalleled in America’s history; to be sure, the world community condoned it but as time passed, it lost its “raison d’etre” and became hard to justify.
The Indian foreign and security policy establishment too owes an explanation why Prime Minister was misled to make such extremist viewpoints regarding the Afghanistan situation during his November visit to the U.S. Despite our claim to be “natural allies” of the U.S., we were either not taken into full confidence by Washington, or we couldn’t read Barack Obama’s mind. Worse still, we couldn’t fathom the enormity of the drain of U.S. global influence.
Where did the establishment go wrong? First, our flawed Afghan policy stands exposed. It has a thirteen-year old history. It was circa 1997-98 that Delhi probably began sliding into a strategic mistake by regarding Afghanistan as a theatre of India-Pakistan rivalry. That was a reversal of the Indian policy, which was best evident during the 1992-95 period when despite overtures from the Mujahideen, the Narasimha Rao government stubbornly refused to get involved in any form in Afghanistan’s fratricidal strife — although the temptation to pay Pakistan back in the same coin for the low-intensity war in J&K (and the Valley was witnessing incessant bloodshed at that time) was always lurking in the shadows. The level-headed estimation in South Block was that India-Pakistan differences were already far too vexed and blood-soaked to add yet another dimension to them.
Pakistan has special interests in Afghanistan — just as India would have in Nepal or Sri Lanka — with which it shares a 2,500-kilometre-long border with sub-nationalities straddling the border regions inextricably tied by bonds of culture, religion and social kinship. Forever will the Pakistani ties remain the number one foreign policy priority for any government in Kabul. Yet India got so entangled in the Hindu Kush that Pentagon spokesman last week openly demanded “transparency” regarding Delhi’s intentions. We overreached. A good beginning lies in the government picking up the threads of the discussions in Sharm Al-Sheikh and transparently addressing Pakistani concerns regarding Baluchistan. The cornerstones of India’s Afghan policy are unshakeable. The issue at the moment is to introspect whether we unwittingly came to erect a grotesque structure during the past decade.
Secondly, the impasse of India’s current near-total isolation as the international community surges ahead with the engagement of the Taliban exposes a few highly disturbing salients regarding our recent foreign policy postulates. One, contrary to our claim, Pakistan’s geopolitical positioning is superb, as testified by the star participants at the regional conference hosted by Turkey on January 26 from which India was pointedly excluded at Islamabad’s instance — Afghanistan, Russia, China, Iran, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and the U.S. and Britain. The London conference underscored that the prospects of the reconciliation with the Taliban critically depended on Pakistan’s cooperation. It couldn’t have been otherwise.
Two, Delhi is paying a price for putting all eggs in the American basket. The U.S. is entitled to look after its national interests. The spectre that is haunting Washington today cannot be overstated: a prolonged war in Afghanistan is unsustainable financially, materially and politically; the NATO allies lack faith in the U.S.’s war strategy; domestic public opposition to the war is cascading in the western countries; the war has become an Albatross’ cross hindering the optimal pursuit of U.S. global strategies in a highly volatile international situation posing multiple challenges; the war radicalises the Muslim opinion worldwide and pits America against Islam. India could have anticipated that the U.S. was reaching the end of the tether and was pondering what lay ahead.
What lies ahead? Make no mistake that the Taliban are returning to Afghanistan’s power structure — quite plausibly, under Mullah Omar’s leadership. The U.S. expectation to “split” the Taliban will likely prove misplaced. As months ebb away, fighting intensifies and Omar in no particular hurry, Washington’s pleas to Islamabad will become more and more insistent to bring the so-called Quetta Shura to the negotiating table. Pakistan (or, more appropriately, Pakistani military) will have the option to cooperate or lapse into sophistry and claim helplessness. How the Pakistani military chooses to play will almost entirely depend on the pound of flesh it can extract from the U.S. At a minimum, there will be an India-dimension to it — thanks to our flawed Afghan policy and our failure to develop diversified consultations with like-minded countries such as China, Iran and Russia that have high stakes in regional security and stability. The silver lining is that once in power, the “Afghan-ness” of the Taliban is bound to surface.
Finally, it all boils down to one single core issue. There is no alternative to the “Sharm Al-Sheikh approach” to address the India-Pakistan relationship. The government got unduly fazed by the charge of the Indian light brigade and valuable time was lost. When it is clear that jingoism is a road to nowhere, the leadership should have drawn the line. The London conference underlined that international opinion is heavily weighed against waging wars — leave alone simultaneous wars on two fronts. India can learn lessons from the annals of modern diplomacy: how adversaries incrementally became joint stakeholders in cooperation by pursuing creative ideas and initiatives. France and Germany; Germany and Russia; Turkey and Greece — they were locked in deathly embraces one way or another in modern history. The best way ahead for India is to emulate their example, which is that when erstwhile adversaries become stakeholders in shared enterprise, it renders obsolete their historical antipathies and autarchic mentalities.
(The writer is a former diplomat.)
21) Inclusive growth: the missing ingredient in Bihar’s success story
Shireen Vakil Miller
Despite staggering economic growth, Bihar has one of the highest rates of child mortality in India.
— Photo: A.M. Faruqui
The anomaly between impressive economic growth and appalling rates of malnourishment is not peculiar to Bihar. The country as a whole records malnourishment rates that do not reflect the economic growth. A scene in Madhya Pradesh.
Bihar has been in the news recently for recording an average growth rate of 11.3 per cent for the period between 2004 and 2009. Much has been written about the quality of governance and the improved state of roads. This is indeed commendable, and no mean achievement, for a State that had virtually become a “development outcast”. I was pleasantly surprised to note on a recent trip to Bihar the great improvement made in providing more schools and notably, a huge effort to tackle the complex issue of child labour.
The script for Bihar’s success story is incomplete, however. The State has the dubious distinction of having one of the highest rates of child mortality in India. Out of every 1,000 children born in Bihar, 85 will not live to see their fifth birthday (according to the third National Family Health Survey). The deaths of a third of these children are associated with malnutrition. In fact, the Citizen’s Alliance against Malnutrition states that over 58 per cent of children in Bihar are malnourished. And the State, despite spending crores of rupees on improving the state of the roads, has failed to utilise the funds allotted to it under the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) which is mandated with tackling under-nutrition among children under six years of age.
The anomaly between impressive economic growth and the appalling rates of child mortality and underweight children is not peculiar to Bihar. The country as a whole has recorded an impressive economic growth (real GDP per capita grew by 3.95 per cent per year between 1980 and 2005). Yet, the percentage of underweight children under 3 went down by just six per cent from 52 per cent in 1992-93 to 46 per cent in 2005-06. Evidence suggests that for every 3-4 per cent increase in per capita income, underweight rate should decline by one per cent. This has not been the case in India.
At the present rate of progress, India will reach the Millennium Development Goal 1 target on eradicating extreme hunger only by 2043.
As we move to greater economic growth rates, the challenge we face is to make this growth more inclusive, ensuring that all of us, especially the most disadvantaged and marginalised groups benefit from this economic growth. Children especially must see the benefits of this growth now if we are to sustain economic growth in the future.
The reality in 2010 is that almost 50 per cent of India’s children are malnourished. In the nation’s capital alone, 42.2 per cent of children under five are stunted and a shocking 26.1 per cent are underweight.
Malnutrition stunts physical, mental and cognitive growth and makes children more susceptible to respiratory and diarrhoeal illnesses. Malnourished children are more likely to die as a result of common and easily preventable childhood diseases than those who are adequately nourished. According to a UNICEF report, 1.95 million children below the age of five die annually in India mainly from preventable causes that are directly or indirectly attributable to malnutrition. The children who survive the ravages of malnutrition are more vulnerable to infection, do not reach their full height potential and experience impaired cognitive development. This means they do less well in school, earn less as adults and contribute less to the economy.
While we have impressive policies and schemes such as the ICDS, these have not made a significant impact. The ICDS needs to reach the poorest and most excluded groups who need it the most, both in rural and urban areas. This is not the case however. Only 28.4 pc of children under six are able to access services provided by an anganwadi centre. Just in Delhi alone, for example, only 8.4 per cent of children under six have accessed an anganwadi centre.
India spends less than five per cent of the annual budget on children. The 2009-10 Union Budget earmarked 4.15 per cent on children! This, in a country where 447 million people are aged 18 and below! Of the total budgetary allocation on children, a mere 11.1 per cent is for child health schemes.
It is the poorest children in the poorest communities who experience much more malnutrition than their better-off counterparts. And yet, existing national nutrition plans barely tackle the socio-economic causes of the problem.
There is an assumption that economic growth will solve the problem of malnutrition but, in fact, economic growth often fails to reduce poverty. The economic causes of malnutrition are set to deepen: food prices remain high and are expected to stay high, the economic downturn is pushing millions more into poverty and climate change is causing an increasing number of extreme climatic events that devastate livelihoods and lead to destitution.
We have good policies and schemes in place. The time has come to implement these and more importantly, monitor their implementation. A task group on nutrition was set up by the Prime Minister’s Office in October 2008 but it appears that it has not yet met. We know which districts are hardest hit, we need to reach those districts and build the capacities of local health and nutrition workers to deliver effective services. We need to ensure greater convergence between the ministries that have responsibility for tackling malnutrition so that we have integrated plans at the district and panchayat levels to reach the communities that need it the most.
In the third century BC, Patna was the greatest city in India; the seat of the Maurya dynasty with Emperor Ashoka at the helm. Ashoka was arguably one of our greatest and most forward thinking leaders, who believed in inclusive development. If Bihar pays attention to social development ensuring that its economic growth benefits its most excluded groups and minorities, it may yet again lead the way for other States.
(Shireen Vakil Miller is Director of Advocacy with Save the Children)
22) When the media set the agenda
Hasan Suroor
The obsession of the Indian media with Pakistan in their pursuit of easy headlines turned the London meet on Afghanistan into a sideshow.
A lot of Indian television viewers and newspaper readers could be forgiven if they thought that last week’s conference of world leaders in London was about India and Pakistan’s running feud over the 26/11 attacks rather than Afghanistan, and that the whole thing ended up in a “war of words” between External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna and his Pakistani counterpart Shah Mahmood Qureshi.
For this was how it was treated by a section of the Indian media, especially TV channels, with their breathless reporting of Krishna-Qureshi exchanges giving the impression that this sideshow (how it was contrived, we will come to that in a bit) was the real thing.
But banish the visions of an India-Pakistan riot at Lancaster House. The fact is that despite their differences — including over Afghanistan — the two countries were at their civilised best throughout the conference and, in the end, helped produce an important agreement with both expressing satisfaction with the outcome.
The entire controversy around the Krishna-Qureshi row was instigated by TV channels to spice-up what otherwise would have made for dull television. What? An international conference with India and Pakistan in starring roles and no fireworks? What an awful waste of precious footage that would have been!
No wonder, they showed little interest in the conference except to use it as a “peg” for the sexier India-Pakistan story.
It is important to stress that on the eve of the conference there was no hint of the “storm” to follow. Both Mr. Krishna and Mr. Qureshi had only friendly words for each other. For example, when it was reported that Mr. Qureshi wished to have bilateral discussions with his Indian peer on the sidelines of the conference, Mr. Krishna responded warmly that he would be only too happy to meet him. And when they met in the course of the summit they were courteous to each other, if not exactly ecstatic. According to Mr. Qureshi, they shook hands and said “hello”.
Within hours, however, their tone had hardened with Mr. Qureshi accusing India of “sulking” over the Mumbai attacks and “shying away” from a dialogue — and Mr. Krishna returning the compliment with a sharp jibe about Pakistan’s terror links. “People who are sitting in the epicentre of terror, I think they should look inwards and they should introspect,” he said curtly, reacting to Mr. Qureshi’s remark that the Indian “polity” was “divided” over resuming the dialogue with Pakistan.
So what changed?
On the face of it, nothing happened at the conference that can be said to have provoked the row that followed. But, yes, something did happen outside the conference hall; and it was this: a well-known TV journalist from New Delhi appeared on the scene and effectively hijacked the agenda as far as the Indian media coverage of the summit was concerned by focussing on India-Pakistan tensions in interviews with Mr. Qureshi and Mr. Krishna.
Neither said anything new or particularly provocative. With a few new adjectives thrown in, Mr. Qureshi basically repeated the old line accusing India of petulance and insisting that Pakistan was doing its best to deal with New Delhi’s grievances while Mr. Krishna reiterated the well-known Indian official position. But in TV terms anything said “live” on camera and with an “exclusive” tag attached to it (not to mention the backdrop of an international summit, and in a major western capital to boot) is presented — and perceived — as big news.
And once it is on TV, others find it hard to ignore; especially if it purports to be a public spat between India and Pakistan at the highest level: Foreign Ministers feuding in London on the margins of a world meet!
No prizes are offered for guessing what is more likely to make the headlines: A “stabilisation” plan for Afghanistan? Or Qureshi “slams” India ; and Krishna, Qureshi “spar” over Mumbai attacks? Naturally a lot of the Indian media plumped for the latter.
The fact, though, remains that it was a spurious controversy tailored to the demands of 24/7 rolling TV news without regard for the consequences. If as a result of this row India-Pakistan relations get worse, then for once it would be hard to disagree with those who may blame it on the media.
No doubt, it has become fashionable to dismiss every controversy as a “media creation” and often there is not enough appreciation of the pressures on TV journalists to produce headlines (that is the nature of the beast they must feed to remain in business) but there are times when, as a viewer, if one knew how a story was created and packaged, one would feel cheated. And this was one of those occasions.
The episode also underlined Indian media’s obsession with Pakistan in their pursuit of easy headlines which in the case of TV channels, of course, translate into ratings. Yes, yes, the hacks across the border are similarly obsessed with India (if anything, even more) but I am talking about us.
23) Lancet retracts paper on MMR vaccination
Sarah Boseley
The medical journal the Lancet on Tuesday finally retracted the paper that sparked a crisis in MMR vaccination across the U.K., following the U.K.’s General Medical Council’s decision that its lead author, Andrew Wakefield, had been dishonest.
The medical journal’s Editor, Richard Horton, told the Guardian on Tuesday that he realised as soon as he read the GMC findings that the paper, published in February 1998, had to be retracted.
“It was utterly clear, without any ambiguity at all, that the statements in the paper were utterly false,” he said. “I feel I was deceived.”
Many in the scientific and medical community have been pressing for the paper, linking the MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) injection to bowel disease and autism, to be quashed. But Mr. Horton said he did not have the evidence to do so before the end of the GMC investigation last Thursday.
In 2004, when concerns were first raised about the conduct of the study, the Lancet asked the Royal Free hospital, north London, where Dr. Wakefield and his fellow authors worked, to investigate.
But Professor Humphrey Hodgson, then vice-dean of the Royal Free and University College school of medicine, wrote to the journal to say it had found no problems. “We are entirely satisfied that the investigations performed on children reported in the Lancet paper had been subjected to appropriate and rigorous ethical scrutiny,” he said at that time.
The GMC last week disagreed. Children had been subjected to invasive procedures that were not warranted, a disciplinary panel ruled. They had undergone lumbar punctures and other tests solely for research purposes and without valid ethical approval.
Dr. Wakefield “was dishonest”, said Mr. Horton. “He deceived the journal.” The Lancet had done what it could to establish that the research was valid, by having it peer-reviewed. But there is a limit, he said, to what peer-review can ascertain.
“Peer review is the best system we have got for checking accuracy and acceptability of work, but unless we went into the lab or examined every case record, we can’t ever finally rule out some element of misconduct. The entire system depends upon trust. Most of the time we think it works well, but there will be a few instances — and when they happen they are huge instances — where the whole thing falls apart.” — © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
24) Bending the curve downward on U.S. deficit
Kevin Connolly
While the U.S. President wants to cut spending in the longer term, in the short term he is presiding over some startling deficits.
Keeping the national accounts of the United States is one of the biggest and most important jobs in world governance.
It is also the dullest, because it involves painstakingly collecting information about billions of transactions — and constantly revising estimates in the light of changing circumstances.
It is big because of the sheer size of the American economy. The national debt currently stands at more than $12 trillion — if you took that amount of money in $10 bills and laid them end-to-end, it would reach the sun, more than 90 million miles away. Actually that statistic is slightly out of date — it would now reach quite a bit further into space.
And it is important because for all you read about the rise of China and the emergence of India and Brazil, what happens in America matters enormously to the rest of us, as American consumer demand remains a powerful locomotive for pulling the wider world out of recession.
So there is good reason to look hard at the $3.8 trillion budget President Barack Obama has proposed, at the numbers that underpin it and the assumption on which it rests.
In political terms, Mr. Obama came on like a deficit hawk, sternly warning Washington that the time had come for politicians to “stop acting like they were spending monopoly money”.
He did not mention his predecessor by name, but there were harsh words for George W. Bush, who was castigated for funding two wars and several tax cuts through borrowing rather than cutting spending elsewhere.
It is a smart move for Mr. Obama to sound dry and disapproving of profligate government.
His Democratic Party has lost three important elections in recent months (a Senate seat in Massachusetts and the governorships of New Jersey and Virginia).
Those defeats were worrying signs for the White House that the kind of independent centrist voters who helped sweep Mr. Obama to power might be starting to panic at the costs of the stimulus programme and health care reform.
But Mr. Obama is by instinct an interventionist, the kind of politician who believes that government works, and he came to office during a recession.
He argues that without swift and aggressive increases in public spending, a bad recession could have become a great depression.
So while Mr. Obama wants to position himself as a hawk in the longer term, in the short-term he is presiding over some startling deficits.
In this financial year, the government will borrow more than $1.5 trillion and next year the figure will be only slightly lower. Both of those figures are higher than anything reached under Mr. Bush. And in the years to come, the White House figures show America continuing to run a huge budget deficit, albeit at something like half the current levels.
Slowing, not solving
But do not forget that the annual deficit is the rate by which the overall national debt is going up every year, so cutting the deficit means slowing down the rate at which the problem is growing, not solving it.
And there are longer term difficulties to remember as well.
First, Mr. Obama’s stated goal of getting the deficit down to just over $700 billion by 2014 is based on a steady growth rate of 4 per cent — that would be quite an achievement, even for the United States.
And on top of that, sometime towards the end of the decade, there will be a spike in retirement as the baby-boomers stop working and start claiming government-funded medical benefits.
The generation that built American prosperity is not going to vote for an administration that threatens their right to a comfortable retirement.
To some extent, Mr Obama’s hands are tied.
Drop in the bucket
He talks — as politicians all over the world are prone to do — of eliminating wasteful government spending. But the amounts that will yield are a drop in the bucket set against a deficit that may be heading towards the $20 trillion mark in a few years time.
On top of that — anxious to appease his supporters and to avoid giving ammunition to his critics — he is promising to protect certain areas of spending, including defence budgets and spending on health and social security.
That means any savings to come must come from the so-called discretionary areas of the budget which account for only about a fifth of the overall total.
That constraint produced one of the biggest headlines of budget day, with the announcement that the space agency Nasa will not be given the cash to buy a taxpayer-funded successor to the space shuttle for putting astronauts into orbit.
There will be cash, but only enough to commission a vehicle from the private sector.
It makes good fiscal sense at the moment but brace yourself for some angry headlines if America appears to fall behind China, or indeed India, in the race back to the moon and beyond.
In the longer term, Mr. Obama plans some sort of commissions which would include both Democrats and Republicans to mull over public spending decisions.
It would be a neat trick if he could pull it off — giving the opposition a share of the blame for unpopular spending cuts would make excellent strategic sense. But of course, he has to persuade Republicans to sign up to it too.
And that of course, brings us to one strong argument that works in Mr. Obama’s favour.
Republicans who are so concerned about out-of-control spending now did not seem so worried (with one or two honourable exceptions) when it was Mr. Bush steering the economy into the red.
Nor are they offering a clear, coherent alternative strategy to set against Mr. Obama’s ideas — or at least not one that is getting any traction with the media or the American public.
So the budget gives us a sort of preview of how America’s political debate is going to shape up in the coming months.
Against a backdrop of a rising deficit, Mr. Obama will attempt to bring spending under control. Expect to hear the phrase “bending the curve downward” quite a bit.
The stakes could scarcely be higher — the long-term vitality of America’s economy is at stake.
But unless he can persuade Americans that he cares about debt and knows how to shrink it, Mr. Obama’s future electoral prospects could be on the line too. — © BBC News/Distributed by the New York Times Syndicate
Corrections and Clarifications
>>The first paragraph of “Earthquakes and science” (Editorial, January 31, 2010) was “The 7-magnitude shallow-depth earthquake of January 12, which had its epicentre about 15 kilometres southwest of Port-au-Prince, Haiti’s capital, ruptured the long Enriquillo-Plantain Garden Fault for a length of about 75 km and width of 13 km to 15 km.” The figures indicated were in miles and not kilometres. They should have been 24.14 km (15 miles); 121 km (75 miles); 21 km (13 miles).
In the same paragraph, the expansion of USGS was given as the United States Geologic Survey. It’s the U.S. Geological Survey.
>>The fifth paragraph of a report “Special train to cover Buddhist circuit” (February 1, 2010) said that Vaishali and Sarnath were where the Buddha preached his last sermon. Vaishali was where the Buddha preached his last sermon, while Sarnath was where the Buddha first taught the Dharma.
25) No end to Iraq’s instability
On February 1, repeating a pattern of attacks carried out a year previously, a woman suicide bomber wearing an abaya or burqa blew herself up among Shia pilgrims passing through Shaab on their way to the holy city of Kerbala in southern Iraq. According to official figures, 54 were killed, including women and children, and 117 wounded. Fears have been raised of more attacks as the Kerbala pilgrimage proceeds to its culmination on Arbaeen (on February 5). Some 14 million people made the pilgrimage in 2009, and even more are expected this time. The physical difficulties of protecting them are obvious; most make the pilgrimage on foot, and many come from the Iraqi province of Diyala, which is known to be a centre for the recruitment and training of female suicide bombers. Iraq apparently does not have enough policewomen to search women at checkpoints. One Iraqi official body has maintained that the explosion occurred near a point where women were undergoing searches, but according to a survivor there were no searches. The use of sniffer dogs is often restricted by local and regional cultural sensitivities. Foreign equipment sold to Iraq has often turned out to be defective, and a British manufacturer of a non-functioning detector of explosives is to face fraud charges in the United Kingdom.
The political significance of the bombing is considerable. No group has yet claimed responsibility for it, though the pattern is consistent with previous Sunni-extremist attacks (including the bombing of candidates’ cars) aimed at discrediting the largely Shia government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and destabilising the run-up to the parliamentary elections scheduled for March. The latest attack has further exposed the civic void caused by the destruction of Iraq’s political and administrative infrastructure after the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003. In addition, such attacks show that their planners can easily outmanoeuvre the Iraqi government and forces, despite the deployment of 50,000 security personnel in Kerbala and Najaf. That in turn reveals the political power vacuum in Iraq seven years after the invasion and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. It is common knowledge that the invasion leaders, the U.S. and the U.K., had no plans for the post-invasion period. Now there is no foreseeable prospect of an end to Iraq’s political instability.
26) Three years and counting
Three years have passed since the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (CWDT) gave its final award on inter-State sharing of the river waters. The Inter-State Waters Dispute Act, 1956 bars any court, including the Supreme Court, from having or exercising jurisdiction “in respect of any water dispute which may be referred to a Tribunal under this Act.” A 2002 amendment to the Act provides further that “the decision of the Tribunal, after its publication in the Official Gazette by the Central Government...shall have the same force as an order or decree of the Supreme Court.” But this is only on paper. The final award of the CWDT has not entered into force because it has not been gazetted — and it has not been gazetted because the matter has been taken to the Supreme Court over the head of the Tribunal and has become part of the law’s interminable delays. With Karnataka challenging the very foundation of the final order and seeking fresh adjudication, Kerala and Tamil Nadu, under political pressure, also pressed their demands in the highest court of the land. Not surprisingly, the Tribunal refused to hear applications relating to the final award on the grounds that the Supreme Court had admitted Special Leave Petitions against it.
Cauvery is a river whose waters have been more or less fully utilised. This means that working out a modus vivendi for fair and equitable sharing among the basin States has been a volatile issue and implementing it in deficit monsoon years will be a tough political challenge. The CWDT was set up in June 1990 at the direction of the Supreme Court after repeated rounds of negotiation among the basin States had failed and the V.P. Singh government informed the court that it did not want to undertake any further negotiation. The Tribunal’s Interim Award came on June 25, 1991 and the final award on February 5, 2007. By any estimation, these awards were just, equitable, and workable. Under the final award, Tamil Nadu’s share of the water to be released by Karnataka at the Biligundulu gauging station was determined as 182 thousand million cubic feet, in addition to the 10 tmcft for environmental purposes. Taking the dispute back to the Supreme Court has defeated the very purpose for which the Tribunal was constituted. It is the guaranteed way of consuming time in years to the detriment of the interests of the farmers and people of the historically celebrated Cauvery basin. Both Tamil Nadu and Karnataka are paying a heavy economic price: in the absence of a settlement, the former’s massive scheme for the modernisation of the Cauvery delta zone is on hold and the latter’s plans for new check dams along the river cannot go ahead. If the dispute is not to drag on for another decade, the Supreme Court must dispose of these petitions efficiently — and allow the Tribunal to be the final adjudicator, as envisaged in the Inter-State Water Disputes Act.
27) A methodology deeply flawed
Madhura Swaminathan
The poverty line that the Tendulkar Committee proposes depends on reduced calorie consumption, and fails to provide for reasonable household expenditures on schooling and health.
For some years, the Government of India has been under pressure to change the norms for calculating the official poverty line. Current norms have resulted in gross and manifest underestimation of the numbers of the poor, and, consequently, in the exclusion of hundreds of millions of people from development programmes. The exclusion of malnourished households from the public distribution system has been the most visible form of such exclusion; exclusion also characterises a wide range of development schemes that are based on the principle of targeting “below poverty line” (BPL) households.
The current poverty lines are based on a consumption basket that derives from a 1973-74 consumer survey, and are intended to ensure 2100 calories per person per day in urban areas and 2400 calories per person per day in rural areas. These poverty lines have been criticised for being too low, and for focussing exclusively on food consumption norms, and ignoring expenditure on health, education and other basic needs.
Less than two months ago, the Report of the Expert Group to Review the Methodology for Estimation of Poverty (chaired by Professor Suresh Tendulkar) was submitted to the Planning Commission.
The best-known outcome of the Report is that the poverty line that it has proposed is higher than the current poverty line for rural areas, and has resulted in a dramatic increase in the proportion of the rural poor in India. At the all-India level, the Report estimates that 41.8 per cent of rural households were below the poverty line in 2004-05 (the current estimate is 28.3 per cent).
While the main outcome of the Report is thus to raise the share of the population below the official poverty line by about 14 percentage points, its methodology is deeply flawed. The poverty line that it proposes actually depends on reduced calorie consumption, and fails to provide for reasonable household expenditures on schooling and health.
The new poverty line for rural and urban areas is simply the old poverty line for urban areas in 2004-05. The Committee defends the choice of the poverty line for urban areas in India in 2004-05 as the all-India poverty line on three main grounds. First, it is defended as being “generally accepted as… less controversial than its rural counterpart.” Secondly, it is defended on grounds of statistical consistency and comparability over time. Thirdly, the Report argues that the proposed poverty line is reasonable because it happens simultaneously to ensure satisfactory nutrition, health and education outcomes.
This claim that the revised poverty line is adequate to meet expenditure requirements with respect to nutrition, education and health is invalid. First, the Committee has actually lowered the calorie intake requirement from 2100 kcal per day for urban areas and 2400 kcal per day for rural areas to a single norm of 1800 kcal per day. The Report says that “the revised minimum calorie norm for India recommended by FAO is currently around 1800 calories per capita per day which is very close to the average calorie intake of those near the poverty line in urban areas (1776 calories per capita).” What it does not say is that the standards set by the Food and Agriculture Organisation for energy requirements are for “minimum dietary energy requirements” or MDER. MDER is defined as the amount of energy needed for light or sedentary activity. Nutritionists prescribe energy requirements that vary by age, sex, and activity level. The proposal that the standard for light activity be taken as the requirement for an average person with expenditure around the poverty line is unacceptable. It is a fiction that will result in a gross underestimation of the population of the poor.
According to the FAO, an example of sedentary or light activity is of “a male office worker in urban areas who only occasionally engage in physically demanding activities during or outside working hours.” No poor person struggling to make a living in the informal sector would fit this description. Can a domestic worker in urban areas who scrubs floors and dishes, and washes clothes at work and home for at least eight hours a day be assumed to engage in light activity? Or can we assume that a head load worker who carries heavy sacks through the day is engaged in light activity? Anyone who has observed how hard the urban poor toil for their paltry wages will see the absurdity of this assumption.
Secondly, the FAO Report warns that in countries where under-nutrition is high, “a large proportion of the population consumes dietary energy levels close to the cut-off point, making MDER a highly sensitive parameter.” In India, drawing a poverty line at the MDER is clearly problematic, since taking a slightly higher cut-off will increase the number of poor people substantially.
Thirdly, FAO data show that in all countries where undernourishment affects less than 5 per cent of the population, irrespective of income level, the average per capita energy supply is greater than 2800 kcal per day. The per capita energy supply was, for example, 3100 kcal per day in Iran, 3320 in Egypt, 2860 in Malaysia and 3030 in Korea. It is thus clear that in countries with low malnutrition, average calorie intake is much higher than 1800 calories.
The Report’s claims about education and health are equally unacceptable.
The Report states that in 2004-05, 90 per cent of children aged 5 to 14 years belonging to households at the poverty line level in the urban areas were in school. This is assumed to be a satisfactory outcome, although it falls short of universal schooling. Secondly, it assumes that the median cost of sending a child to school, as reported in the National Sample Survey employment survey, sets a normative or desirable level of expenditure on a child in school. Thirdly, according to the Report, the average expenditure on education per child among households in the poverty line expenditure class was higher than the median cost of schooling per child. From these observations, it is concluded that actual expenditure is adequate to ensure that children are in school.
The assumption by the expert committee that the median cost is adequate to ensure proper schooling for all children is incorrect.
Here is an illustration. First, given high inequality of expenditure on education in urban India, the median cost is likely to be lower than the mean cost. Thus, if the Committee had taken the mean expenditure as the norm, actual expenditure may have been inadequate among households at the poverty line. Secondly, even if all children of a household at the poverty line are in school, they may not have all the notebooks required or proper uniforms or other study materials. In other words, the fact of school enrolment or attendance is no assurance of the adequacy of household expenditure on schooling. There is no discussion of the absolute level of the estimated median cost of schooling, and whether it can be interpreted as a minimum desirable level of expenditure. Thirdly, the actual expenditure incurred on education by a household at the poverty line may be at the cost of rising indebtedness. If a household is borrowing heavily to send its children to school, the sustainability of educational expenditure is also in question.
In sum, the Expert Group chaired by Professor Tendulkar chose the urban poverty line of 2004-05 to serve as the new national poverty line on the grounds that it was “less controversial” than the current rural poverty line and also fulfilled the requirement of statistical consistency over time. This new poverty line was justified on the grounds that it also provides for minimum nutritional, health and educational outcomes. These justifications do not stand up to scrutiny.
(Dr. Madhura Swaminathan, an economist, is a Professor at the Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata.)
28) Water, aspirations, nature
Ramaswamy R. Iyer
The fact that we must try to minimise the need for water supply augmentation by limiting the growth of its demand in every kind of use has not been widely recognised.
________________________________________
- At the heart of the numerous water-related conflicts lies a competitive, unsustainable demand for water
- Efficiency plus economy plus technology will indeed do some good but will not go far enough
- Is it nature that constrains our aspirations or our aspirations that are destructive of nature?
________________________________________
T.N. Narasimhan’s cautionary and wise article ‘Towards sustainable water management’ in the issue of January 25, 2010 of The Hindu needs to be read widely and reflected upon. The present article takes off from that article and pushes its logic a bit further.
Predictions of water scarcity or a water crisis arise from estimates of water availability and projections of future demand. In recent years, some scholars have questioned the official estimates of water availability in India, and there have been no satisfactory official replies. However, even if the availability of water for use were closer to the official figure of around 1,000 BCM than to the critics’ lower number of 600 BCM, we still face a difficult future because of projected demand. That is where the problem lies.
The general tendency is to attribute the expected water crisis to the projected growth of population. Undoubtedly, more people in India or the world will mean more water requirements. However, if we are thinking only of basic water requirements (drinking, cooking, personal hygiene, etc) or even water for sustenance livelihoods, the pressure on water resources may not assume crisis proportions. It is the other uses (economic or ‘developmental’, going beyond livelihoods) — agriculture, industry, commerce, tourism, urban water supply and sanitation systems, etc, — that generate unmanageable demands for water.
How are we to deal with those demands? The tendency in the past was to accept the demands as given and find supply-side answers (dams- reservoirs-canals; drilling for groundwater, etc). It is only in recent years that we have begun to recognise that there are limits to the augmentation of supplies; that even the augmentation that is technically feasible has economic, environmental, ecological, social and human costs; and that we must try to minimise or at least reduce the need for such augmentation by limiting the growth of demand for water in every kind of water-use. Unfortunately, that recognition is not widespread.
At the heart of the numerous water-related conflicts lies a competitive, unsustainable demand for water. We are asking for water that does not exist. The availability of waters from the Bhakra Nangal project led to the cultivation of paddy in Punjab and Haryana, resulting in a constant demand for ever more water and still more water. That kind of water-intensive irrigation was then extended to the desert State of Rajasthan, generating an unsustainable demand for water there. The stated water needs of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu add up to two Cauverys. At the inter-country level, the combined (claimed) requirements of India/Pakistan and those of India/Bangladesh would need two Indus Rivers and two Ganga Rivers respectively. Should we not seek a way out of this insanity?
Restraining the growth of demand for water is of course not an approach that can be applied to basic needs, but it can and must be adopted in the case of all other water uses. Enhancing the efficiency of water–use in agriculture and industry, improvements in yield or output, minimization of waste in all uses, are objectives on which there will be no disagreement. However, if we do all this, will the projected crisis be averted or even reduced significantly in severity? Assuming that through these means we are able to bring the projection of future requirements (in 2050) down from around 1000 BCM to say, 800 BCM, that will not be a negligible achievement, but it may not avert a crisis; it will merely postpone it.
It follows that efficiency plus economy plus technology will indeed do some good but will not go far enough; a more radical transformation of approach to water-use and of our thinking about water will be needed. Narasimhan is right when he says that “even with the best of available technologies, the finiteness and unpredictable variability of water resource systems place severe limits on human aspirations for prosperity”. However, even that wise statement retains traces of old-style thinking. We need to deconstruct the term ‘human aspirations’. (We are inevitably making a transition here from water to a larger theme; we cannot talk about the demand for water without talking about the demands for many other things.)
There are two points to be noted in this context.
First, is there not a dualism here? We seem to be thinking of aspirations as arising autonomously in the human breast without reference to external factors, and as then being limited/constrained by nature, ecology and planet earth. Would it not be more appropriate for human aspirations to spring from and be in harmony with nature, ecology and Planet Earth?
Secondly, no one will question the desire to meet basic needs of water and sanitation; but we run into difficulties when we start talking about ‘human aspirations for prosperity’. Narasimhan has of course avoided the term ‘development’ and used the more modest term ‘prosperity,’ but to most people the latter term would mean the former. Whether we talk about prosperity or development, our visions are coloured by what we see in Europe and America. All countries aspire to reach the condition of America. Is that desirable, feasible or sustainable? In the climate change negotiations, the developing countries quite rightly blame the western countries for having pursued a developmental path that has cast a heavy burden of depletion, pollution and contamination on Planet Earth, but then proceed to assert their own right to embark on the same destructive path. Let us ask ourselves whether it is nature that constrains our aspirations, or our aspirations that are destructive of nature.
Finally, we must take note of the argument of ‘realism’. In the international context, America does not want to change its lifestyle; the “American way of life” is sacrosanct. Unfortunately, it is a beacon to the ‘developing’ world. In India, there is a good deal of impatience with environmental concerns and accusations of ‘eco-fundamentalism’; ‘development’ on the lines of the west is the paramount concern. Any talk of radical changes or of re-defining ‘development’ is apt to be dismissed as negative or naïve. EIAs have been reduced to a mockery. There are persistent efforts to weaken the Environment Protection Act. Against that background, what receptivity can this article or Narasimhan’s expect?
If we must accept that argument of realism, then let us stop talking about sustainability, give up wringing our hands in despair, embrace ‘development’ ardently, and march gloriously towards whatever lies in store for us. Let us push growth further relentlessly and let the boom go bust, if that is what is going to happen. Let humanity end not with a whimper but a bang. This article will end with that ‘modest proposal’. The phrase is borrowed from the 18th Century Irish satirist Swift; intrigued readers can look it up wherever they look things up: the library or the internet.
Corrections and Clarifications
In connection with the last line in an article “Water, aspirations, nature” (Op-Ed, February 5, 2010), its author Ramaswamy R. Iyer says: “The full title of [18th Century Irish satirist] Swift’s pamphlet (1729) is ‘A Modest Proposal: For Preventing the Children of Poor People in Ireland from Being a Burden to Their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Publick’. The ‘modest proposal’ was that the children should be sold to the rich as food. By citing that pamphlet, the last paragraph of the article was intended to be a piece of grim irony. “In the penultimate line, the phrase ‘not with a whimper but a bang’ was an inversion of the last line of T. S. Eliot’s poem ‘The Hollow Men’.”
29) Lessons of Iraq ignored. The target is now Iran
Seumas Milne
The U.S. military build-up in the Gulf and Tony Blair’s promotion of war against Tehran are a warning of yet another catastrophe.
— PHOTO: AP
NOT A DICTATORSHIP IN THE SADDAM HUSSEIN MOULD: For all Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s inflammatory rhetoric, it is the nuclear-armed U.S. and Israel that maintain the option of an attack on Iran, not the other way round.
We were supposed to have learned the lessons of the Iraq war. That’s what Britain’s Chilcot inquiry is meant to be all about. But the signs from the Middle East are that it could be happening all over again. The U.S. is escalating the military build-up in the Gulf, officials revealed this week, boosting its naval presence and supplying tens of billions of dollars’ worth of new weapons systems to allied Arab states.
The target is of course Iran. Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Bahrain are all taking deliveries of Patriot missile batteries. In Saudi Arabia, Washington is sponsoring a 30,000-strong force to protect oil installations and ports. The UAE alone has bought 80 F16 fighters, and General Petraeus, the U.S. commander, claims it could now “take out the entire Iranian airforce.”
The U.S. insists the growing militarisation is defensive, aimed at deterring Iran, calming Israel and reassuring its allies. But the shift of policy is clear enough. Last week Barack Obama warned that Iran would face “growing consequences” for failing to halt its nuclear programme, while linking it with North Korea — as George Bush did, in his “axis of evil” speech in 2002.
When Iran’s president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, this week renewed Iran’s earlier agreement to ship most of its enriched uranium abroad to be reprocessed, the U.S. was dismissive. Mr. Obama’s “outstretched hand,” always combined with the threat of sanctions or worse, appears to have been all but withdrawn.
The U.S. Vice-President, Joe Biden, underlined that by insisting Iran’s leaders were “sowing the seeds of their own destruction.” And in Israel, which has vowed to take whatever action is necessary to prevent Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, threats of war against its allies, Lebanon’s Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas, are growing. “We must recruit the whole world to fight Ahmadinejad,” Israeli president Shimon Peres declared on Tuesday.
The echoes of the run-up to the invasion of Iraq are unmistakable. Just as in 2002-3, we are told that a dictatorial Middle Eastern state is secretly developing weapons of mass destruction, defying U.N. resolutions, obstructing inspections, threatening its neighbours and supporting terrorism.
No evidence produced
As in the case of Iraq, no evidence has been produced to back up the WMD claims, though bogus leaks about secret programmes are regularly reproduced in the mainstream press. Most recently, a former CIA official reported that U.S. intelligence believed documents, published in the London Times, purporting to show Iran planning to experiment on a “neutron initiator” for an atomic weapon, had been forged. Shades of Iraq’s non-existent attempts to buy uranium in Niger.
In case anyone missed the parallels, Tony Blair hammered them home at the British government’s Iraq inquiry last Friday. Far from showing remorse about the bloodshed he helped unleash on the Iraqi people, the former prime minister was allowed to turn what was supposed to be a grilling into a platform for war against Iran.
In a timely demonstration that neoconservatism is alive and well and living in London, Blair attempted to use the fact that Iraq had no WMD as part of a case for taking the same approach against Iran. Perceived intention and potential capability were enough to justify war, it turned out. Mentioning Iran 58 times, he explained that the need to “deal” with Iran raised “very similar issues to the ones we are discussing.”
You might think that the views of a man that 37 per cent of British people now believe should be put on trial for war crimes would be treated with contempt. But Blair remains the Middle East envoy of the Quartet — the U.S., U.N., EU and Russia — even as he pockets £1m a year from a UAE investment fund currently negotiating a slice of the profits from the exploitation of Iraqi oil reserves. Nor is he alone in pressing the case for war on Iran. Another neocon outrider from the Bush era, Daniel Pipes, wrote this week that the only way for Obama to save his presidency was to “bomb Iran” and destroy the country’s “nuclear-weapon capacity,” entailing few politically troublesome U.S. “boots on the ground” or casualties.
The reality is that such an attack would be potentially even more devastating than the aggression against Iraq. Iran has the ability to deliver armed retaliation, both directly and through its allies, which would not only engulf the region but block the 20 per cent of global oil supplies shipped through the straits of Hormuz. It would also certainly set back the cause of progressive change in Iran.
Iran is a divided authoritarian state, now cracking down harshly on the opposition. But it is not a dictatorship in the Saddam Hussein mould. Unlike Iraq, Israel, the U.S. and Britain, Iran has not invaded and occupied anybody’s territory, but has the troops of two hostile, nuclear-armed powers on its borders. And for all Ahmadinejad’s inflammatory rhetoric, it is the nuclear-armed U.S. and Israel that maintain the option of an attack on Iran, not the other way round.
Nor has the U.N. nuclear agency, the IAEA, found any evidence that Iran is trying to acquire nuclear weapons, while the U.S.’s own national intelligence estimate found that suspected work on a weapons programme had stopped in 2003, though that may now be adjusted in the new climate. Iran’s leadership has long insisted it does not want nuclear weapons, even while many suspect it may be trying to become a threshold nuclear power, able to produce weapons if threatened. Given the recent history of the region, that would hardly be surprising.
Real problem
For the U.S. government, as during the Bush administration, the real problem is Iran’s independent power in the most sensitive region in the world — heightened by the Iraq war. The signals coming out of Washington are mixed. The head of U.S. National Intelligence implied on Tuesday there was nothing the U.S. could do to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons if it chose to do so. Perhaps the military build-up in the Gulf is just sabre rattling. The preference is clearly for regime change rather than war.
But Israel is most unlikely to roll over if that option fails, and the risks of the U.S. and its allies, including Britain, being drawn into the fallout from any attack would be high. As was discovered in the case of Iraq, the views of outriders like Blair and Pipes can quickly become mainstream. If we are to avoid a replay of that catastrophe, pressure to prevent war with Iran will have to start now.
Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
30) Cyberwar is ‘rapidly growing threat’
Simon Tisdall
The International Institute for Strategic Studies says cyber attacks could become weapon of choice in future conflicts.
Cyber warfare attacks on military infrastructure, government and private communications systems, and financial markets pose a rapidly growing but little understood threat to international security and could become a decisive weapon in future conflicts between states, the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London warned on Wednesday.
The institute’s director-general, John Chipman, said: “Despite evidence of cyber attacks in recent political conflicts, there is little appreciation internationally of how to assess cyber conflict. We are now, in relation to the problem of cyber warfare, at the same stage of intellectual development as we were in the 1950s in relation to possible nuclear war.”
The warning accompanied publication of the Military Balance 2010, the institute’s annual assessment of global military capabilities and defence economics. The study also highlighted a series of other security threats, including the war in Afghanistan, China’s military diversification, the progress of Iran’s nuclear programme, and the impact of terrorist groups in Iraq and elsewhere.
Future state-on-state conflict, as well as conflicts involving non-state actors such as Al-Qaeda, would increasingly be characterised by reliance on asymmetric warfare techniques, chiefly cyber warfare, Chipman said.
Hostile governments could hide behind rapidly advancing technology to launch attacks undetected. Unlike conventional and nuclear arms, there were no agreed international controls on the use of cyber weapons.
“Cyber warfare [may be used] to disable a country’s infrastructure, meddle with the integrity of another country’s internal military data, try to confuse its financial transactions or to accomplish any number of other possibly crippling aims,” he said.
Yet governments and national defence establishments at present had only limited ability to tell when they were under attack, by whom, and how they might respond.
Cyber warfare typically involves the use of illegal exploitation methods on the internet, corruption or disruption of computer networks and software, hacking, computer forensics and espionage. Reports of cyber warfare attacks, government-sponsored or otherwise, are rising. Last month Google launched an investigation into cyber attacks allegedly originating in China that it said had targeted the email accounts of human rights activists.
In December, the South Korean government reported an attack in which it said North Korean hackers may have stolen secret defence plans outlining the South Korean and U.S. strategy in the event of war on the Korean peninsula.
Last July, espionage protection agents in Germany said the country faced “extremely sophisticated” Chinese and Russian internet spying operations targeting industrial secrets and critical infrastructure such as Germany’s power grid.
One of the most notorious cyber warfare offensives to date took place in Estonia in 2007 when more than a million computers were used to jam government, business and media websites. The attacks, widely believed to have originated in Russia, coincided with a period of heightened bilateral political tension. They inflicted damage estimated in tens of millions of euros.
China last week accused the Obama administration of waging “online warfare” against Iran by recruiting a “hacker brigade” and manipulating social media such as Twitter and YouTube to stir up anti-government agitation.
The U.S. Department of Defence’s quadrennial defence review, published this week, also highlighted the threat posed by cyber warfare on space-based surveillance and communications systems. — © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
Some other key points of IISS report
— The insurgency in Afghanistan is complex and Pakistan’s full cooperation remains elusive.
— Al-Qaeda retains the capability to launch regular attacks in Baghdad.
— Technical difficulties frustrate Iran’s nuclear ambitions but all the same Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium continues to grow.
— The IISS looks forward to increased defence cooperation between France and Britain, saying both countries needed to spend smarter because they cannot afford to spend more.
31) Cell phones fuel increase in exam cheating
Rachel Williams
The number of British school pupils trying to cheat in public examinations, many by smuggling cell phones into the exam hall, rose last year. According to official statistics out on Wednesday, penalties for what is formally known as exam malpractice rose by 6 per cent.
More than 4,400 penalties were issued to students, and there was a jump of 29 per cent in the number handed out to teaching staff at examination centres. Penalties to staff were up from 68 to 88, according to exams regulator for England and Wales Ofqual, with those for helping students cheat increasing to 58.
The most common type of cheating by pupils was bringing in unauthorised material — mainly phones and other electronic communication devices they could use to access the internet or look up stored information.
Other banned items being sneaked into the exam hall included calculators, dictionaries or study guides. Some 1,897 penalties were given in this area — up 8 per cent on the year before. The number of penalties to school or other exam centres was up 35 per cent . — © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
32) Corrections and Clarifications
>>The caption of a standalone PTI photograph (“Business” page, February 3, 2010) was “A rare honour – First of Its Kind: Bollywood actors Shah Rukh Khan and Kajol at NASDAQ on Times Square, New York, on Monday to promote their latest movie ‘My name is Khan’. The honour is usually reserved for CEOs of major corporations.” A reader wondered how promoting a film is a rare honour.
It should have just said “Bollywood actors Shah Rukh Khan and Kajol at NASDAQ on Times Square, New York, on Monday.”
The actors rang the opening bell, the first time that it has been performed by Indian film celebrities. The ceremony (an honour) is normally performed by CEOs of major companies. A NASDAQ (or its obsolete expansion National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotations) release said: “The stars will ring the opening bell on February 1, 2010, to celebrate the release of their film, which opens worldwide on February 12.”
>>A clarification. In connection with a report “Nayar and Dhawan rescue BP XI” (“Sport”, February 3, 2010) — on the opening day of the two-day practice match at the Vidarbha Cricket Association Ground, Nagpur — there was confusion over player Mithun’s name being included in the bowling but not in the batting line-up. The two-day game is a friendly warm up 15 players-a-side game in which the teams, by mutual consent, are allowed to choose 11 to bat and 11 to field. This is why Mithun’s name was missing from the batting line-up while he was allowed to bowl.
33) End of a friendship
The expulsion of Amar Singh and Jaya Prada from the Samajwadi Party was an inevitable sequel to the escalating war of words between the individuals loyal to Mulayam Singh’s former confidant and the party’s current dispensation. Each side has accused the other of bringing the SP to ruin. In the litany of charges against Mr. Amar Singh, two stand out. The first is that he introduced a culture of glamour and corporate deal-making that struck at the socialist-subal tern character of the party. The second allegation is that he brokered a pact with Kalyan Singh under whose malevolent watch the Babri Masjid met its brutal end. These are not unknown truths, which Mr. Amar Singh himself accepts with the caveat that whatever he did was in the party’s best interests. A valid question arises: why did it take his detractors 14 years to decide he was causing the party unspeakable harm? After all, Mr. Kalyan Singh had a previous association with the SP, which by all accounts was tolerated by the party; it ended in 2004 with his return to the Bharatiya Janata Party. Mr. Mulayam Singh’s achievements are considerable. A leader of the grassroots, like Charan Singh and Karpoori Thakur, he far surpassed them in popularity — achieving an iconic status with the Muslim community, which christened him ‘Maulana Mulayam’ for the stellar role he played in safeguarding the Babri Masjid.
Mr. Mulayam Singh is an astute politician whose understanding of rustic politics influenced a legion of successors, among them no less than Lalu Prasad. To portray him as a pristine innocent in opposition to the ‘wily and opportunistic’ Mr. Amar Singh is to undermine the SP chief and a relationship that was mutually beneficial. Where does the party go from here? In the imagination of the old guard, it will recapture its lost glory once it returns to its pre-Amar Singh past. But that was a past uncluttered by modernity and socio-political complications. In the last 14 years, the towns and villages of Uttar Pradesh have changed considerably, with the young, as everywhere else, eager to learn English and be computer savvy. They are unlikely to root for a party that refuses to keep pace with the times. The intensely competitive nature of U.P. politics also means that the SP will have to muster all its resources to garner the ‘plus’ votes, that is, votes outside of its core constituency. These votes are in every political party’s calculation today; they can make the difference between victory and defeat. Chief Minister Mayawati is a past master at building alliances to expand her party’s social base and the Rahul Gandhi-led Congress is emerging as a significant rival. Mr. Mulayam Singh certainly has his task cut out.
34) d puzzle solved
Did birds evolve independently or from dinosaurs? The question has been settled by a recent discovery; the findings are published in the latest issue of Science. A ten-foot long, nearly complete fossil discovered in 160-million-year old mudstone beds in northwest China provides indisputable evidence that birds evolved from dinosaurs. The young adult fossil is clearly a transitional one between dinosaurs and birds. It belongs to a new genus of alvarezsauroid dinosaurs: Haplocheirus sollers (meaning “simple, skilful hand”). The discovery has pushed back the fossil record of alvarezsauroid by 63 million years. What is particularly significant is that the fossil unearthed is about 15 million years older than the earliest known bird — Archaeopteryx. To confirm that birds descended from dinosaurs, it was essential to have fossils of bird-like theropods in the early stages of the transition and predating the Archaeopteryx. The absence of such evidence led to a paradox in the time scale (temporal paradox) and made some scientists believe that birds developed independently. While some recent discoveries from the Jurassic Period have challenged the temporal paradox, they were not able to settle the question. They were not truly transitional fossils and shared many morphological characteristics with birds, and moreover the ages of these fossils are “poorly resolved,” as the paper notes. The discovery of Haplocheirus sollers has finally solved the temporal paradox.
Haplocheirus has all the morphological features to be called the transitional form and the earliest among the alvarezsauroid dinosaurs. The curved, serrated teeth and canine teeth indicate it was a carnivore. It is by far the largest alvarezsauroid ever found: big for a bird and small for a dinosaur. According to the authors of the Science paper, certain characteristics of its digits imply that the “hand was fully functional…and retained some grasping ability.” Compared with the Haplocheirus, the derived alvarezsauroid dinosaurs from the Jurassic Period have undergone several morphological modifications that place them later in the evolutionary lineage. There has been “extreme morphological convergence between birds and derived Alvarezsauroid,” the authors conclude. There has been a rich haul of dinosaur fossils from China and the latest discovery establishes that alvarezsauroidea originated in Asia rather than in South America as was originally thought. Looking for fossils in rocks belonging to the late Jurassic Period and the appropriate depositional environment will be the key to find other missing fossils between Haplocheirus and the derived alvarezsauroid.
35) A project to undermine autonomy
Thomas Joseph
The NCHER Bill does not allot appropriate levels of autonomy to State governments and universities. Concentration of powers in the commission will undermine academic autonomy and federalism in governance.
The publication of the draft Central legislation on the constitution of the National Commission for Higher Education and Research (NCHER) lays bare the real objectives of the United Progressive Alliance government in dismantling the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All-India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) and setting up a body with overarching powers and responsibilities. (The document is on the website of the Ministry of Human Resource Development, at www.education.nic.in).
It is no longer necessary for academia to engage in endless discussions on the impossibility of reconciling the vision of academic freedom that Professor Yash Pal put forward with the agenda of neo-liberal reforms that Sam Pitroda was so impatient to implement. The Task Force constituted to aid and advise the MHRD to set up the NCHER has side-tracked the issue by paying lip service to the objective of promoting autonomy and recommending a structure that would centralise planning, administration, regulation and financing of higher education, leaving little room for either decentralised academic activity or federal structures of governance in higher education. It is becoming clear that the orchestrated campaign against the discredited deemed universities was but a ploy to divert attention from the agenda of dismantling federal and democratic structures and putting in their place a highly centralised and authoritarian system that is amenable to the emerging global trends in higher education.
In setting up the NCHER the underlying presumption is that the quality of higher education could improve dramatically if multiple regulatory agencies are replaced by the benevolent dictatorship of an all-powerful and overarching agency endowed with the kind of status that the Election Commission of India enjoys. It is further presumed that a consensus among the Prime Minister, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha and the Leader of the Opposition would result in the selection of seven wise men or women who are competent and committed enough to innovate and implement academic policies and programmes relevant for this vast country. The presumption, which is obvious enough, is sought to be covered up by the veil of a national collegium of advisers, a structure that will be neither completely within, nor completely outside, the proposed national commission.
Unequal mix
The structure of the collegium is complicated in that it has two types of members: one set of core members and another set of co-opted members. It is not clear from the draft as to who would nominate the core members, how many of them would be nominated, and whether the nomination of the core members would precede or proceed from the constitution of the commission. As the arrangement stands, the collegium has to suggest a panel from which the members of the commission will have to be selected. Obviously, such an arrangement will bring the collegium into existence, at least in part, before the commission is born. But once the commission comes into existence, the collegium will take on the role of an advisory body, the advice of which will not be binding on the commission.
The co-opted members have only a subordinate status in the collegium in that they owe their position to the support of the core members and in that their tenure is limited to five years while the core members are nominated for life. The patronage of a position for a lifetime is an innovation for which the MHRD can take credit! The possible rationale is that it would ensure both continuity and change in the determination of policies in higher education.
Deficit of federalism
The deficit of federalism in the new arrangement to regulate higher education is evident from the mode of appointment and the status of the co-opted members who will represent the States and Union Territories in the collegium. The collegium is only an advisory body, external to the commission, the advice of which is not binding on the commission. The right of the core fellows to decide on the area of expertise that particular States could provide in the collegium could be effectively used to eliminate the possibility of federal dissent. The only right the States have is to propose a panel of five experts, of whom one will be chosen by the core fellows.
An arrangement in which the Central government could nominate experts in various fields and the States representatives of their choice, would have been more in tune with the principles of federalism. This would have ensured the representation of a variety of views and interests in the collegium, while also ensuring due representation of experts. The integration of the collegium into the structure of the commission as its governing body with policy-making responsibilities, and the constitution of a seven-member executive committee from within the governing body and responsible to it (in place of the present seven-member commission) will make more sense, in both academic and federal terms.
The authority of State legislatures to set up universities will be seriously eroded once the commission comes into existence. In the new situation, universities set up through State Acts can start academic operations only with authorisation from the commission. A better option would have been to make authorisation mandatory for the operation of universities beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the legislating authorities.
The Bill provides for the preparation of a national registry of people eligible to be selected as Vice-Chancellors and mandates that Vice-Chancellors of State universities be appointed from a panel of names selected by the commission from the registry. The question is not whether the commission would always act fairly, but whether such an arrangement would be consistent with the principles of autonomy of higher educational institutions, which is touted as the basic objective of the commission. The idea of a registry may not be an objectionable one if States have the option to choose any name from the registry and if the right to appoint a person as Vice-Chancellor from outside the list is not entirely ruled out.
Though the commission is insulated against any intervention by the Central government in its day-to-day administration, the Central government has adequate powers to determine the general policies on higher education and interpret such policy prescriptions. The provision for the exercise of such powers by the Central government has been incorporated to ensure that the government’s right to frame policies and implement them are not delegated to a small agency created by it.
But the Act does not fully recognise the complementarities in the roles of the Central and State governments, universities and other institutions of higher education. The primary objective of promoting autonomy of higher educational institutions has been overlooked by the appropriation of all powers by the proposed NCHER. The roles of the State governments, universities and other higher educational institutions within their territorial and constitutional jurisdiction have either been trampled upon or ignored. Autonomy implies decentralisation of powers and responsibilities and creation of appropriate norms and structures at different levels to ensure accountability. The Act does not apportion appropriate levels of authority to States, universities and other higher educational institutions, and in the process it violates the principles of federalism and autonomy in the governance of higher educational institutions.
(Thomas Joseph is Member-Secretary, Kerala State Higher Education Council. E-mail: t.thomas.joseph@gmail.com)
36) Cracks in Hindutva brotherhood
Vidya Subrahmaniam
The Shiv Sena and the MNS are ideological partners of the RSS parivar, both believe in the notion of the ‘other.’ Yet the parivar is opposing them today because of its own political compulsions.
— PHOTO: VIVEK BENDRE
STRAINS IN RELATIONS: It is competitive chauvinism that is at the heart of the quarrel between the Shiv Sena and the BJP-RSS.
Just when one thought it could not get any worse, it has. Uddhav Thackeray’s “Italian mummy-Italian Rajputra” tirade against Rahul Gandhi and his unceasing threats to Shah Rukh Khan mark a new low in the conduct of a party that has practised violence as if it was a sacred credo.
While the Shiv Sena’s young leader bellows and thunders, his cousin, Raj Thackeray, dangerously teeters on the brink. At a public rally in Dombivili in Mumbai, he wondered aloud at the irony of Samajwadi Party MP Abu Azmi not being able to speak Marathi when terrorist Ajmal Kasab could.
The Thackeray cousins’ words and action offend by the yardstick of civility and even more by the yardstick of Constitutional law and morality. But recognising this is not enough. Raj Thackeray is playing with fire because the Shiv Sena showed the way. The Shiv Sena showed the way because successive regimes have tolerated its violence and because its partners, the BJP and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, have successfully walked the path of intolerance. In a theoretically pluralist, multicultural and composite India, the parivar’s affiliates have been practically able to uphold the notion of an exclusivist India.
The degree of fanaticism has increased exponentially with each mutation — from the BJP to the Vishwa Hindu Parishad to the Bajrang Dal on the one hand, and from the Shiv Sena to the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena on the other. But because the Sena and the MNS are rivals, there is less certainty about who will beat the other in the race to be more provocative.
The Sena and the MNS are unashamedly crude while the parivar gives the impression of being more sophisticated. Most BJP-RSS leaders will not directly attack Muslims and Christians, much less say that they should go to Pakistan or some other place. Yet “cultural nationalism”, the parivar’s foundational philosophy, explicitly dictates that religious minorities must own up their Hindu origins and agree to fall within the rubric of Hindutva or suffer injuries to their identity, dignity and their persons.
The BJP’s slogan for all times, “justice for all, appeasement of none,” seems the epitome of reasonableness. But the real meaning of this is known to the party rank and file, which explains why the anthem invariably translates on the ground as aggression against minorities. Even at the level of the leadership, the mask slips, as it did when, during the 2002 Gujarat election campaign, Narendra Modi invoked images of “mian Musharaff” and mounted lowbrow attacks on “Italian” Sonia Gandhi. Mr. Modi has since had an image makeover and today inhabits a perfectly respectable world peopled by top-notch industrialists and Bollywood icons. By contrast, the Thackerays are currently under attack from all quarters, including the RSS and the BJP, their fellow travellers in the battle for the Hindu mind.
The last bit is a real puzzle — as much for the fire-spewing Mr. Uddhav Thackeray as for BJP-RSS watchers familiar with the Sena-BJP’s cosy relationship of the past 25 years. Naturally, Thackeray junior got into a lather when, of all people, RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat denounced his Marathi manoos project. In an editorial in Samna he said: “RSS should not comment on any issue that is to do with Mumbai… If RSS wants to talk of protecting Hindi they should do it in South India first.”
Since then the Sena’s relationship with the BJP-RSS has gone for a further toss. Over the past week, Parivar spokespersons have quoted copiously from the Constitution to dispute the Sena’s exclusive claim over Mumbai. Mr. Shah Rukh Khan, never a beloved of the Parivar, has overnight turned into a friend, with the BJP defending to the hilt his twin rights — to exhibit his film, “My name is Khan”, as well as to lament the exclusion of Pakistani cricketers from the IPL tournament.
In Delhi, Vinay Katiyar, the founder president of the disruptive Bajrang Dal, disparaged the Marathi Manoos campaign and called for an end to the BJP-Sena alliance. Not long ago, Mr. Katiyar and the Shiv Sainiks had unitedly sworn to do all they could to despatch the Babri Masjid, erupting in a paroxysm of joy when the symbol of their hatred finally met its brutal end.
The RSS-BJP’s seeming change of heart and the strains in the saffron brotherhood defy the common understanding of Hindutva politics. After all, the Sena’s “anti-outsiders” campaign is hardly any different from the Sangh’s (and the Sena’s) own anti-minorities agenda. The “alien”, or the “other” is the diametric opposite that defines and legitimises Hindutva. Having zealously pursued this divisive goal for three quarters of a century, and having assiduously instilled the concept of the “enemy” in its affiliates, how can the Sangh today preach the reverse to the Sena, the BJP’oldest and most faithful partner? For the Sena, divisiveness is like breathing and it is understandably appalled that one of its own kind should be asking it to liquidate itself.
Objectives undermine each other
The conflict between the Sena factions and the RSS-BJP arises from the complexities of the latter’s politics. The Sena and the MNS have an almost unidimensional view of the world, a world inhabited by the Marathi people and no one else. The BJP and the RSS have multiple constituencies to address. And though it has been the Sangh’s endeavour to see these constituencies subsumed under the overarching umbrella of Hindutva, in reality their separate objectives have undermined each other as well as the common goal.
OBC (Other Backward Classes) leaders Kalyan Singh and Uma Bharti are one face of this persisting tension. Mr. Kalyan Singh and Ms Bharti were both in the forefront of the Ayodhya agitation. The former watched over as the Babri Masjid came down brick by brick, and went to jail to prove his Hindutva credentials. Ms Bharti’s ecstatic response to the fall of the Masjid has been captured for posterity by photographers. Between them they symbolised Hindutva as no one else did and could. Yet when it came to deciding between their OBC and Hindutva identities, they chose the former.
It is to address the OBC constituency that the BJP propounded “social engineering” and co-opted the likes of Mr. Kalyan Singh and Ms Bharti. But it failed to retain them because it remained ‘upper caste’ at heart.
The BJP’s Hindi fetish is another impediment in the way of its acquiring a pan-India face and following. Just how complicating this factor can be was revealed during President Bill Clinton’s 2000 visit to India. Mr. Clinton addressed MPs from both Houses in the Central Hall of Parliament following which . Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee also spoke. But in Hindi. This despite Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam chief M. Karunanidhi’s pleas to him speak in English as Hindi was not understood in large parts of India.
But Mr. Vajpayee, with his proud record of having addressed the United Nations General Assembly in Hindi, refused to budge. The upshot was a sharp rebuke from Mr. Karunanidhi. The “agonising spectacle” of Mr. Vajpayee speaking in Hindi before a world audience was reminiscent of the “Hindi fanaticism” of the past, the DMK chief noted.
Significantly, Mr. Vajpayee overrode Mr. Karunanidhi’s objections and spoke in Hindi because had he not done so, he would have earned the wrath of the Hindi-speaking Mulayam Singh. It is this constituency that the RSS and the BJP are focused on today. With Assembly elections to Bihar looming large, and its largest partner, the Janata Dal(U) aggressively standing up for Hindi-speaking migrants, the BJP could not afford to be left behind, especially given that it relates to Hindi the way the Sena relates to Marathi. In a sense, it is competitive chauvinism — one for Marathi and the other for Hindi — that is at the heart of the quarrel between the Sena and the BJP-RSS.
Corrections and Clarifications
The second paragraph of an article “Cracks in Hindutva brotherhood” (Op-Ed, February 6, 2010) said that Abu Azmi is a Samajwadi Party (SP) MP. He is an SP MLA (Maharashtra). He represented Uttar Pradesh in the Rajya Sabha from November 2002 to November 2008.
37) Green Hunt: the anatomy of an operation
Aman Sethi
Away from the gaze of the media and the judiciary, the adivasis of Bastar are paying a heavy price … for just being there.
An operation is underway in Central India, but no one really knows what it is. Variously described as a media myth, a comprehensive hearts and minds strategy, and an all-out offensive by paramilitary forces and the state forces along the borders of Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra, Operation Green Hunt has become a shoebox of news clippings, police reports, public demonstrations and armed encounters.
Depending on the definition, Green Hunt either began in July 2009, September 2009 or November 2009. Speaking off record, senior policemen confirmed that the intensification of “search and comb” operations in Chhattisgarh began as early as July last year. In September 2009 the press reported on the progress of “Operation Green Hunt”: a massive 3 day joint operation in which the central CoBRA force and state police battled Naxal forces in Dantewada.
By November, the press was regularly reporting on the planning and progress of Green Hunt, prompting Home Minister, P. Chidambaram to term the operation a “media invention.” Since then, the security apparatus has scrupulously avoided all mention of Green Hunt. The week-long joint operation, launched on December 25 2009 in
Change in nomenclature
Chhattisgarh and Maharashtra for instance, was termed “Police Week.” The change in nomenclature could be prompted by a realisation that the battle between the state and the Naxals is unlikely to end anytime soon. Speaking on background, police sources confirm that the conflict shall take the form of “a prolonged, open-ended engagement” rather than a short, fierce “operation.”
There is also little clarity on the extent of troop deployment, the composition of the forces and the chain of command between central paramilitary forces and the state police. Privately, sources in the security apparatus admit that part of the confusion is by design rather than by default to control the information available to Naxal commanders. At present, the only information independently confirmed by The Hindu relates to the Bastar Zone, a 40,000 square kilometre area in Chhattisgarh that lies at heart of the battle. Sources state that 7 additional battalions of central forces have been moved in the area, bringing the strength of central forces in Bastar to a total 20 battalions including troops from the CRPF, ITBP, BSF and SSB. Taken alongside the 6,000 policemen deployed in Bastar, the size of the total fighting force in the zone is about 20,000 troops.
“The first step was to secure the roads. Ninety to ninety five per cent of casualties of security forces occur on the roads.” said T.J. Longkumer, Inspector General of Police, Bastar in an interview to this reporter. “We have started road security operations and indentified ambush prone areas.” It is the next step that is proving controversial. “Forces shall actively enter villages and nab naxal elements,” he added. Longkumer insists that search operations are conducted only on the basis of concrete intelligence and that all possible care is taken to minimise the death of innocents. However, information emerging from villages in the interior suggests otherwise.
Figures provided by the police suggest that a majority of police operations have targeted “Sanghams” with 499 sangham members arrested in 2009 – up from 214 in 2007. Sanghams refer to village level bodies installed by the Naxals in areas under their control. Sangham members are considered to be sympathetic to the Naxal cause, but it is important to note that sangham members are not necessarily armed. While the number of Naxals killed has also increased to 113 in 2009, as compared to 66 in 2008, and the number of civilian deaths attributed to Naxal violence has reduced from 143 in 2008 to 116 in 2009, Chhattisgarh does not keep any record of civilians killed by the security forces. Police sources cite this as validation of the state’s efforts to minimise civilian casualties, but sceptics see this as tautology where all those killed by the police are retrospectively termed Naxals.
Two PILs pending in the Supreme Court since 2007 have highlighted precisely this problem, asking for an inquiry into killings, rapes and murders since 2005. They have provided an initial list of over 500 people killed, and subsequently pointed to discrepancies in the police version and the FIRs filed. Initially, the bodies were not even counted; now they are recorded as Naxalites killed in encounters. The NHRC, which investigated a small sample of the killings on the orders of the Court, noted with respect to the sangham members: “These villagers were specifically targeted when Salwa Judum was on the rise. The enquiry team has come across instances where some of these villagers were even killed (no criminal cases were, however, either reported or registered). Though the State has taken action against SPOs in some cases for violations like murder and attempt to murder, but these cases do not pertain to the violence let loose on innocent villagers during operations against Naxalites.”
Despite the gravity and urgency of the situation, there has been no hearing of this case for over a year now, because a suitable ‘non-miscellaneous’ day has not been available. Not surprisingly, allegations of unlawful killing continue to dog the state authorities. A writ petition filed in the Supreme Court last year implicates the Chhattisgarh police in the deaths of a total of 12 villagers in Gachanpalli and Gompad villages as part of “sanitisation” operations in September last year. As reported previously in The Hindu, the Chhattisgarh police have assumed control over at least four of the 13 petitioners, and have actively prevented them from meeting their lawyer. Witnesses to the Gompad incident have accused the police of killing innocents at random.
Fluid identities
On the other side, on January 21 2010 local newspapers reported the killing of two “police informers”, one a 16 to 18 year old tribal youth, in Chhattisgarh’s Narayanpur district. Police sources cited in the story attributed the killing to the Eastern Bastar Division Committee of the Naxals. At a press conference in Raipur, Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram stated that the two youth were killed as they wanted to join the Indian Army.
As the battle-lines between the Naxals and the State shift with every jungle encounter, adivasis across the zone of operations are forced to assume a series of fluid identities contingent on the force in power on a given day.
In a police operation with no clear name, timeline or goal, fought against a guerrilla force that rarely wears uniforms, the adivasis are learning that each side extracts a heavy price for supporting the other.
Corrections and Clarifications
• A sentence in “The Generals and their labyrinth” (Editorial, February 3, 2010) was “Regrettably, the controversy was allowed to malinger and was exacerbated by perceptions that the Army Chief, General Deepak Kapoor, was reluctant to act firmly against his aide and Military Secretary, Lt. General Avadhesh Prakash.” It should have been “linger”. “Malinger” is “to pretend to be ill in order to escape duty or work” and is thought to have come from the French word “malingre” (“mal”– wrongly + “haingre” – weak).
• The creditline for the article “Lessons of Iraq ignored. The target is now Iran” (Op-Ed, February 5, 2010) was inadvertently left out and should have said “— © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010”.
• Late entries.
The text and photocaption of a report “Ability awards fare getting bigger” (Chennai city, January 31, 2010, page 2) said that Ms. Mohini Giri is the Chairperson of the Guild of Service. Ms. Giri is the Chairperson of the Delhi branch of the Guild of Service.
• The sixth paragraph of a report “Srikrishna front runner for Telangana panel” (January 30, 2010) was “When the then Nizam State was merged with Andhra Pradesh (which was carved out of the Madras Presidency), a gentlemen’s agreement was reached between the two Chief Ministers that people from Andhra/Rayalaseema would not buy property in Telangana, the sources said.” A reader said there was no such thing.
The story was based on comments made by a Congress Working Committee member and a member of the Rajya Sabha. The Gentlemen’s Agreement 1956 was signed on February 20, 1956, by the then Chief Ministers of Andhra and Hyderabad (Nizam State) states. In that, under the sub-heading — A. Regional Standing Committee – point number 6 (8) says “Sale of agricultural lands in Telangana area to be controlled by the Regional council.” According to the MP, many authors have written books on the Gentlemen’s Agreement and interpreted that particular point to state that no one, particularly those from Andhra/Rayalaseema regions, could purchase property in the Telangana areas without the approval of the Regional Council. This permission was necessary as leaders were apprehensive that cash-rich real estate developers and landlords (in Andhra/Rayalaseema) might exploit backward and poor farmers/people in the Telangana regions after the merger of the two States and buy their land at throwaway prices.
• The heading of a report “Aluminium die-casting factory opened in Cheyyar SEZ” (Tamil Nadu, January 21, 2010, page 7), and the first paragraph that said it was located in the Cheyyar Special Economic Zone were incorrect. The plant has been opened in the SIPCOT Industrial Park, Chellaperumpulimedu village, Sozhavaram Post, Cheyyar. The heading and detail in the text should have been “... opened in Cheyyar” or “... opened in Cheyyar DTA [Domestic Tariff Area]”. (The photocaption had the right detail.)
38) A difficult choice
It is not surprising that the expert panel headed by Kirit Parikh on the pricing of petroleum products should recommend total decontrol of the retail prices of petrol and diesel while suggesting a more gradual approach in the case of kerosene and LPG. In July-August 2008, the B.K. Chaturvedi committee had recommended a similar deregulation, although in its case, the process of aligning domestic prices with global ones was to be spread over several months. If the Kirit Parikh panel has its way, petrol and diesel prices would go up by between Rs.3 and Rs.4 a litre immediately, wiping out “the under recoveries” of public sector oil companies and substantially reducing the level of government subsidies. For the cooking fuels — kerosene and LPG — it calls for a nuanced approach but even here an immediate price rice of about Rs.100 for an LPG cylinder and Rs.6 for a litre of kerosene sold through the public distribution system (PDS) is suggested. The expert group charged with the task of devising “a viable and sustainable system of pricing of petroleum products” has had to come up with a methodology of minimising, if not avoiding altogether, the burden of subsidies. The three major public sector companies are expected to end this year with a total of Rs.45,500 crore as “under recoveries,” with kerosene accounting for about Rs.17,420 crore and LPG Rs.14,152 crore.
Making out a case for the continuance of subsidy on kerosene in rural areas, the panel has recommended that the price should be revised every year in relation to the per capita agricultural GDP. Among its suggestions to narrow the gap due to “under recoveries” is the sharing of production revenue from nomination blocks of the upstream government-owned oil companies, the ONGC and Oil India. Cash subsidy in certain cases should be charged to the budget. Even with these and other measures, subsidies would still be required but they will remain stable at a manageable Rs.20,000 crore. In a sensitive area such as petroleum product pricing, the government will need to consider the political realities as much as hard-headed economics. It is indeed a difficult choice between coming up with a sudden, unpopular jump in petrol, diesel, kerosene and LPG prices on the one hand and, on the other, continuing to bear ever increasing subsidies that would stretch the fiscal balance to the breaking point. Also, at a time when the government is under criticism for letting food and essential prices rise, an increase in fuel prices could raise transportation costs and push up the prices of essentials further. It is, however, clear that the present system of pricing petroleum products is not sustainable and a change, even if gradual, is imperative.
Corrections and Clarifications
A sentence in the first paragraph of “A difficult choice” (Editorial, February 8, 2010) was “For the cooking fuels — kerosene and LPG — it calls for a nuanced approach but even here an immediate price rice of about Rs.100 for an LPG cylinder and Rs.6 for a litre of kerosene sold through the public distribution system (PDS) is suggested.” It’s “price rise”.
39) Facing up to Gaza truths
On February 2, Ehud Barak, Israel’s Defence Minister and a former Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) chief of staff, stated that unless Israel made peace with the Palestinians, it would lose its Jewish majority or become an apartheid state. The context is the increasing domestic and international pressure on its government to hold a public inquiry into Operation Cast Lead. The three-week war, waged in 2008-2009 against Hamas forces in Gaza following a clear Israeli breach of a ceasefire, resulted in the death of 1,400 Palestinians and 13 Israelis. To start with, Israeli soldiers have told the country’s biggest-selling newspaper, Yedioth Ahronot, that the IDF rewrote the rules of engagement in Cast Lead. This was to protect Israeli soldiers at the expense of Palestinian civilians; and the targeted killing of ‘identified terrorists’ was turned into a shoot-first, ask-later policy. Secondly, an international mines action team, followed by United Nations technical staff, has confirmed finding part of an air-dropped 113 kg Mk 82 bomb in the ruins of the sole functioning flour mill in Gaza. Judge Richard Goldstone’s report to the United Nation concludes that the mill attack was intended to deny sustenance to the civilian population; it was potentially a war crime, and negates Israeli claims to have observed international law during Cast Lead. Thirdly, Israel denies disciplining two senior officers for using white phosphorus munitions in Gaza, though it does not deny using the chemical. Finally, in an attack on a civilian-occupied U.N. compound on January 6, 2010, the IDF massacred 40 Palestinians despite knowing that its troops had not been fired on from within the compound.
Mr. Barak’s warning is, however, at best partial. Since winning the 1967 war with Egypt, Israel has had a population of over 1.5 million Palestinians, whom it intends neither to expel nor to absorb as citizens with full rights. A viable Palestinian state would presumably relieve Israel of the charge of apartheid. Secondly, Mr. Barak has mentioned neither the 500,000 illegal Israeli occupants of the West Bank nor a halt to further construction there. The historian, Avi Shlaim calls this a dispute over a pizza in which one person continues to ‘gobble up’ the pizza during the discussions. Furthermore, Mr. Barak’s own government has rejected all calls for a freeze on further West Bank settlement; this means that a major precondition for a peace agreement will not be met. Can there be the slightest doubt that Israel is simply not up to reaching a just and equitable agreement with the Palestinians?
Corrections and Clarifications
The last sentence in “Facing up to Gaza truths” (Editorial, February 8, 2010) was “Finally, in an attack on a civilian occupied U.N. compound on January 6, 2010, the IDF massacred 40 Palestinians ….” The year should have been 2009.
40) Pakistan: vindication on Afghanistan, assertive with India
Nirupama Subramanian
There is confidence in Islamabad that its new importance to international interests in the region can be leveraged to secure its own interests vis-a-vis India.
As New Delhi prepares to put the Mumbai attacks behind for a re-engagement with Pakistan, there is confidence in Islamabad that its new importance to international interests in the region can be leveraged to secure its own interests vis-a-vis India.
After years of being seen as part of the problem in Afghanistan, Pakistan is savouring what it calls a vindication of its position on how to end the conflict in that country, and is confident it holds the key to the proposed new plan of “reconciliation” with the Taliban.
As evident from two sets of remarks by the Pakistan Army chief last week about what it seeks in Afghanistan and how its perceives India, New Delhi will need to factor in a resurgent Pakistani military, assertive about its concerns and self-assured of the resonance these carry in the halls of power in the U.S. and Europe.
From Pakistan’s point of view, the flurry of recent diplomatic moves on the Afghan conflict, culminating in the London Conference, was definitely the game-changer. Certainly, the new international mood seems to have played some role in drawing India back to the negotiating table.
London Conference
The details of the new approach in Afghanistan formalised at the 60-nation conference are still hazy. A cash-for-peace plan aimed at weaning away non-ideological and “moderate” Taliban fighters is one part of it, but the broad consensus emerging from the conference was that there is no way forward in Afghanistan without engaging the Taliban in dialogue, perhaps towards its eventual participation in the governance of that country.
“The outcome of the London Conference has been overall positive. It is a vindication of Pakistan’s position that we need to focus on all aspects of the strategy of the three D’s [dialogue, development and deterrence],” Abdul Basit, spokesman of Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, told The Hindu. “The international community now realises that without moving forward on the reconciliation aspect, it is not possible to achieve peace in Afghanistan.”
The decisions at the London Conference were not a total surprise. There were plenty of signals that the U.S. and its NATO allies in Europe no longer believed in the possibility a military victory over the Taliban, and were looking for a dignified exit. Except that the military operations in Afghanistan will now be aimed at persuading the Taliban to negotiation, the next steps in the new roadmap for “reconciliation” and “reintegration” of the Taliban are still hazy. The main actors themselves seem unclear about many things.
Is dialogue to take place with only “moderate” sections of the Taliban? How far have talks, already reported to have begun, progressed? What will be offered to the Taliban? Will there be other parties on the table?
The U.S. remains apprehensive about the idea of talking to the top Taliban leadership. In any case, the big question for any such effort is whether the Taliban can cut off their links with Al Qaeda, give up their extremist views and reconcile with the political and social values of a democratic set-up.
Still, it is hoped that by mid-2011, when U.S. troops will begin withdrawing, enough reconciliation would have taken place for Afghans to run their country themselves.
Two countries are thought to have sufficient influence on the Taliban to be able to deliver on the London Conference decisions. Saudi Arabia, one of only three countries that recognised the Taliban-run Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan from 1996 until 9/11 — the other two were Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates — has already been asked by President Karzai to act as a mediator. The kingdom, which has no love lost for Osama bin Laden, has set the pre-condition that the Taliban must renounce Osama bin Laden and the Al Qaeda.
Pakistan still carries considerable clout with sections of the Afghan Taliban, some of whom were given safe haven on Pakistani soil when the U.S. started the war in Afghanistan after 9/11, and continue to remain in sanctuaries in the north-western frontier regions.
“Gatekeepers” to the Taliban
Described as the “gatekeepers” to the Taliban, Pakistan would have a crucial role in delivering the Taliban to the table, either through coercion or persuasion. But it is being careful not to be seen as muscling in to impose its own agenda in Afghanistan. The mantra in Islamabad is that the process should be “Afghan-led”.
“Pakistan is perhaps better placed than any other country in the world to support Afghan reintegration and reconciliation. Why? We speak the same language, we have common tribes, a common religion, we have a commonality of history, culture and tradition” Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi told the Guardian. “But it [Pakistani mediation] depends on whether we are asked to do so. If asked, the government of Pakistan would be happy to facilitate.”
But suspicious of its intentions, President Karzai has not been keen to involve Pakistan as a mediator, while the rest of the international community too is aware that while Islamabad could play a positive role, it could also use its influence over the Taliban to play “spoiler.” But, most observers say, no country except Pakistan can guarantee an end to the conflict in Afghanistan.
“If any country other than Afghanistan has any role, it is Pakistan. It may not be explicit right now, but it is implicit and goes without stating. Whether it is maintaining peace, security and stability of Afghanistan,” said Mushahid Hussain Sayed, secretary-general of the Pakistan Muslim League (Q), “or providing a face-saving exit for American forces, it has to be Pakistan.”
A constructive role by Pakistan is likely to come attached with the demand that the international community address its “legitimate” concerns and issues in the region.
Some of those concerns were articulated by the Pakistan Army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani when, in two meetings with journalists this week, he said India remains the primary threat to Pakistan and the focus of the Pakistani military. He spoke of the peace, security and stability of Afghanistan as the main element of Pakistan’s “strategic depth”, and said Pakistan had a more “legitimate” expectation in the matter of training the Afghan security forces than India.
A Foreign Ministry official, who wished not to be identified, was blunter: “We do not really see India playing any role in Afghanistan. Any role for India in Afghanistan can only be problematic”. On the other hand, he said, Pakistan could not be wished away from Afghanistan, and had “a more natural role” in Afghanistan, given the shared border and other links.
Also, U.S. demands to “do more” against the Afghan Taliban holed up in Pakistani territory no more hold any logic, said Imitiaz Gul, author of a book on Al Qaeda and head of the Islamabad-based Centre for Research: “These demands have to a back seat. If we have to talk to them, why antagonise them?”
The Pakistan military said last month it would not launch new offensives against militants for six months to a year as it was overstretched. The declaration was evidently meant to pre-empt any demand during the recent visit by the U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates for military operations in North Waziristan. Now, said Mr. Gul, the Pakistan Army would want to wait to see how the situation unfolds in Afghanistan.
As Pakistani observers see it, their country has never been better positioned in recent times. At a recent seminar in Lahore’s Punjab University, Mr. Sayed spoke of how the Obama Administration is dependent on Pakistan for its Afghanistan strategy, and on China, a close ally of Pakistan, to maintain regional stability, while India has been downgraded a couple of notches by the Obama Administration from its status during the Bush years..
“The regional situation is moving towards Pakistan’s advantage. We have a strategic opening and we should use it to our advantage,” Mr. Sayed told The Hindu. This, he said, should include reining in India from using Afghanistan for what he alleged were its covert activities in Pakistan, and pushing for a solution on the Kashmir issue.
So is Afghanistan going to turn into a battleground for the competing interests of India and Pakistan? Not necessarily, said Mr. Sayed.
“In my view, Pakistan and India do not have to compete in Afghanistan,” he said, suggesting that the two countries hold bilateral talks on Afghanistan, and “see how we can co-operate instead of compete” in that country.
At the moment, as India and Pakistan do a tug-of-war over what their renewed engagement should be called, that seems easier said than done.
41) Southeast Asia’s new focus on India, China
P. S. Suryanarayana
Evocative, against a newly researched historical trail of India inSoutheast Asia, is the call for a “new rationale, new passion” in the equation between New Delhi and Beijing.
The expanding focus on China and India in Southeast Asia can be seen as a popular fashion or, more fundamentally, a matter of practical diplomacy. Either way, India and China were in such focus, in the alternate order of their names, as the week-long ‘Singapore Airshow 2010’ ended on Sunday (February 7).
Neither India nor China courted undue attention at the show, but they were seen, alongside the United States, as the architects of a future Asia-Pacific order. Such a nuanced view, which did not eclipse Japan’s potential role, was evident during the Airshow-related Asia Pacific Security Conference on February 1. The big idea was not the result of any extraordinary insights or, alternatively, crystal-gazing or even wishful thinking. For the pundits, just some conventional logic of futurology, based on the present-day trends in world politics, was sufficient.
Of greater interest was the novelty of India being celebrated at the popular cultural level in the ongoing countdown for the Chinese New Year Day. A mini musical show at Chinatown in Singapore on Sunday (February 7) had a Bollywood song on India as an interlude. A greater awareness of India and its potential as a multidimensional power is increasingly evident in Malaysia as well, especially at the official levels.
The India-centred sequence of a few unrelated events in Singapore in recent weeks has, therefore, came as no surprise. On a different track, China remains in constant view on the regional horizon, with some commentators even raising speculation about a futurist Pax Sinica.
The India-centred events in Singapore have presented many shades. A Bollywood-theme song-and-dance show by an Australian producer in mid-January was about one of India’s current passions: the cinema. Another passion, cricket, was not ignored. Sunil Gavaskar was the special guest for Singapore’s own Twenty-Twenty cricket tournament. India’s High Commissioner to Singapore, T.C.A. Raghavan, inaugurated the event on January 30. The City-State’s President, S.R. Nathan, presented the trophy on the following day. The tournament has been so designed as to launch Singapore’s bid to host major matches as a neutral venue for the current international cricket teams.
Of relevance to political diplomacy, a book on India’s place in the world-view of Singapore’s elder statesman Lee Kuan Yew was released on January 7. President Nathan released the book by Sunanda K. Datta Ray. It studies India’s Look East policy, first enunciated by P.V. Narasimha Rao, in a larger perspective than commonly understood. In a sweep of the global idiom, India is seen to have sought links with the political West by looking towards the East in the first place.
Signifying a thematic leap to the mediaeval era from such perspectives, a book on India’s historical links with Southeast Asia was launched on January 27. Published by the Singapore-based Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (ISEAS), the book was released by Sugata Bose, a Harvard University Professor. The title of the volume edited by ISEAS Director K. Kesavapany and two others, is a tale in itself. An unusual historical phase is sought to be narrated in Nagapattinam to Suvarnadwipa: Reflections on the Chola naval expeditions to Southeast Asia.
The broad theme is best conveyed in the words of Hermann Kulke, a German scholar in Asian history and a co-editor of this book. Under the scanner is the “claim” of the Chola King, Rajendra I, about his naval expeditions to Southeast Asia nearly one millennium ago. His “claim” relates to the Cholan conquest of over a dozen harbour-cities of the Southeast Asian kingdom of Srivijaya in the early 11th Century A.D.
Kulke writes: “The first distinct South Indian influences [in Southeast Asia] are usually linked with the famous Buddhist art of Amaravati [in Andhra], and the Pallava Grantha of present-day Indonesia’s earliest inscriptions in the 5th A.D.” These ancient South Indian influences in Southeast Asia were “followed by the strong impact of Pallava and Chola art and architecture.” In this perspective, the maritime triumph “claimed” by Rajendra I in about 1025 A.D. “was a unique event in the otherwise peaceful and culturally exceedingly fruitful relation of India with its neighbours in Southeast Asia” in historical times.
The mystery of missing references to the Chola expeditions in the relevant Chinese texts is sought to be addressed in the book. And, Tansen Sen, Head of the Nalanda-Sriwijaya Centre at the ISEAS in Singapore, has traced the “Chola-Srivijaya-China triangle.” On the mystery itself, Kulke writes that “it is one of the ironies of the history of Indo-China relations [India-China relations] that the extant Tamil inscriptions in China date only from 1281 [A.D.], two years after the final fall of the Cholas.” He emphasises that the Cholas were, historically, the Indian dynasty that was “most actively involved in maritime trade with China.”
Predating such links was the influence of Nagarjuna’s thoughts on the evolution of Buddhism in China, a subject expounded by a present-day Chinese diplomat Jiang Yili. Evocative, against such a newly researched historical trail, is the latest call by a Chinese security expert, Zhu Feng, for a “new rationale, new passion” in India-China ties.
In today’s global perspective, the India-China relationship, a matter of national interest to Southeast Asia, acquires a wider canvas. A key factor, as outlined by Dean Cheng at the Asia Pacific security conference in Singapore on February 1, is the current space race in the region. The major powers in such focus are the U.S., China, India, Japan, and Russia.
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has a vital stake in the stability of the India-China equation. Also, the latest dissonance in the China-U.S. ties over the American arms sales to Taiwan and the status of Dalai Lama is viewed seriously in Southeast Asia. In a related sense, the proposal of a non-official China-India-U.S. dialogue is an idea whose time may have come.
42) Orphanages of Haiti offer bleak portrait
Ginger Thompson
The earthquake intensified the problems of poverty and ineffectual government.
— PHOTO: AP
A woman with her child at a health centre in Port-au-Prince on Friday.
The floors were concrete and the windows were broken.
There was no electricity or running water. Lunch looked like watery grits. Beds were fashioned from sheets of cardboard. And the only toilet did not work.
But the Foyer of Patience here is like hundreds of places that pass as orphanages for thousands of children in the poorest country in the hemisphere. Many centres are barely habitable, much less licensed. They have no means to provide real schooling, or basic medical care, so children spend their days engaged in mindless activities, and many die from treatable illnesses.
And in the wake of an earthquake that has left this city in ruins, there is growing concern that an already strained system is being overwhelmed, that inadequate orphanages are taking in more children than they can handle and that vulnerable parents are turning to unregulated and often shady organisations for help. Haitian and international authorities also fear that some of the less scrupulous orphanages are taking advantage of the chaos to round up children in crisis and offer them for sale as indentured servants and sex slaves.
Haiti’s child welfare system was broken before the earthquake struck, a casualty of grinding poverty and ineffectual government. The earthquake intensified both problems even as it shattered homes and drove hundreds of thousands of people into the streets, multiplying the number of children in need of care.
But it took the arrest last weekend of 10 Americans caught trying to leave the country with 33 Haitian children to focus international attention on the nation’s most vulnerable population. While there is no evidence that the Americans, who said they were trying to rescue the children from the earthquake, meant any harm, the case exposed the vast holes in the system that traffickers exploit to trade on an estimated tens of thousands of Haitian children a year.
International children’s advocacy groups say the ease with which the Americans could drive into the capital and scoop up a busload of undocumented children points out the lack of safeguards in the system.
“This has called the world’s attention because it is the first clear piece of evidence that our fears have come true,” said Patricia Vargas, the regional coordinator for SOS Children’s Villages, which provides services to abandoned children around the world. “Our concern as an organisation is how many other cases are out there that we are not aware of.”
The front line of the system is the orphanage, which in Haiti runs the gamut from large, well-equipped institutions with significant international financing to one-room hovels where a single woman in a poor slum cares for abandoned children as best she can.
Most of the children living in them, the authorities said, are not orphans at all, but children whose parents are unable to provide for them. To desperate parents, the orphanage is a godsend, a temporary solution to help a child survive a particularly tough economic stretch. Many orphanages offer regular visiting hours for parents, and when their situations improve, parents are allowed to pick up their children and take them back home.
Tools of exploitation
But instead of protecting vulnerable children, the authorities fear that some orphanages have become tools of their exploitation.
“There are many so-called orphanages that have opened in the last couple of years that are not really orphanages at all,” said Frantz Thermilus, the chief of Haiti’s National Judicial Police. “They are fronts for criminal organiSations that take advantage of people who are homeless and hungry. And with the earthquake they see an opportunity to strike in a big way.”
With black markets difficult to quantify, there is no precise count of the numbers of orphanages in this country, the numbers of children living in them, or the numbers of Haitian children who are victims of trafficking, although UNICEF estimates that number in the tens of thousands of per year. The authorities said thousands of those trafficked were sold as servants, known as restaveks, for well-to-do Haitian families. Others, officials say, are smuggled into the Dominican Republic to do domestic and agricultural work, often in appalling conditions, without any rights.
In recent years, the government has tried to crack down on trafficking, establishing special police units known as child protection brigades that monitor children leaving the country’s airports or crossing its borders. But a State Department report issued last year says the brigades do not pursue trafficking cases because there is no Haitian law against the practice. The government ``did shut down a number of unregistered orphanages whose residents were believed to be vulnerable to trafficking,” the report said.
The Haitian authorities also acknowledge that the fledgling efforts of a financially struggling government long plagued by corruption have proved little match for the highly organised, multimillion-dollar criminal networks.
In the wake of the earthquake, the authorities put all adoptions on hold pending a review of hundreds of applications already in process.
Manuel Fontaine, a child protection specialist with UNICEF, said his agency was also concerned that Haiti’s inability to monitor orphanages and keep track of children moving in and out of them left them open to abuses.
“With the system already fragile before the quake, we knew something like this could happen,” he said of the gambit by the 10 Americans. “We warned authorities here to be on the lookout.”
It was unclear what the future holds for the 50 children crammed into two bedrooms at the Foyer of Patience, some of them scampering around in clothes that were either too big or too small, and others wearing no clothes at all.
The director of the orphanage, Enoch Anequaire, said he opened the centre five years ago but was so busy serving children that he had no time to bother with getting a license. He boasted that he provided an education to the children at his orphanage. But there was not a single book, piece of paper or pencil in the house.
He said he fed the children three square meals. At noon, one recent day, several said that they had had nothing to eat.
Anequaire, whose clothes were pressed and shoes polished, said he had been overwhelmed with new children pouring into the orphanage since the earthquake. He summoned five boys between the ages of 6 and 12 who arrived last Wednesday and said that an aunt had brought them in because their homes had collapsed, and that their mothers were unable to feed them.
Some of the children, however, told a different story. They said Anequaire had come looking for them.
“He came to my house and told my mother he needed 10 more kids,” said one of the boys, whose names were withheld from this article to protect them from retribution.
“He told my mother he would give us food,” said one of the other boys in the group. “Since there was no food in our house, she told us to go.”
Anequaire denies this version of events.
Across the street from the Foyer of Patience stands a two-story compound called the Foyer of Zion, whose staff cares for more than 60 children from 2 months to 10 years old. Zion’s airy, cheerfully decorated rooms are a world apart from those at the Foyer of Patience. Still, on a recent visit, it was woefully understaffed and poorly equipped. And children in the nursery were kept in stacked wooden boxes with some bedding inside, rather than cribs.
The director, Marjorie Mardy, said that the centre was financed by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and that several members from Idaho had rushed to Port-au-Prince after the earthquake to take home children who had been in the adoption process for more than two years. Most of the children at the Foyer of Zion, however, were in legal limbo, Mardy said. Their parents had not given up custody, nor had they any clear plans for bringing the children home. Many children had been dropped off at the orphanage without any documents providing their names, ages, birthplaces or whether they needed special medical care.
— © 2010 The New York Times News Service
43) The future of the past
The death of a language means the passing of many things — a way of life, a cultural identity, a repository of indigenous knowledge. Language is not merely a mechanical means of communication but a medium that shapes the very way we think; as the Austrian philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein observed, the limits of one’s language are the limits of one’s world. The outpouring of nostalgic sorrow and ruminative melancholy over the death at 85 of Boa Sr — the last speaker of the Bo, one of the ten languages of the tribes that populated the Great Andaman archipelago — is recognition that the passing of this grand old lady represents the irreplaceable loss of a part of the world’s heritage, the passage of the remnants of a living culture into memory. It is a reminder of the fragility of the indigenous people of the Andaman islands and the importance of protecting their lives and their culture — which dates back an estimated 70,000 years — from further degradation in the name of ‘upliftment’ and ‘civilisation.’ The dwindling numbers of indigenous people, most of whom were either killed by British colonisers or died through diseases imported by settlers, is reflected starkly in the population of Great Andamenese, down to around 50 from an estimated 5,000 a century ago. Once in residence along the length of the Great Andaman region, they now live in tiny Strait Island, largely deprived of their cultural and linguistic identities.
Only three other tribes survive in the Andaman islands: the 250 or so Jarawas, who resisted contact with outsiders until two decades ago and whose way of life is threatened by the ‘friendly contact’ promoted by the Great Andaman Trunk Road that cuts through their forest homeland; the Onges (around 100), who live in a remote pocket in the Little Andaman; and the Sentinelese, who have fiercely resisted outside contact, and whose numbers and language remain unknown. The Andamans is celebrated for being a storehouse of faunal and floral diversity but its linguistic and cultural diversity has largely been neglected. The languages or dialects of the Great Andamanese are regarded as one of the five language families in India; if Onge-Jarawa is derived from a separate linguistic ancestor as some believe, then this remarkable region would have contributed to two of six language families. While the study of language and cultures is a matter for academics, the effort to preserve them is a political enterprise, a process that requires empowering indigenous communities to protect their ancient traditions and tap into local resources in an autonomous and sustainable way. In the Andamans, more than elsewhere, we need to protect the future of the past.
44) Bumpy road to recovery
The sharp declines in the stock markets around the world last week are significant as much for investors as for the governments framing macroeconomic policies. The almost synchronised fall in equity prices is attributed to major concerns over a possible debt crisis in some European countries. A handful of countries in the Euro zone, notably Greece and Portugal, have come under intense pressure to repay mountains of debt they have run into during years of profligate spending. The fear that even some of the larger European economies such as Spain might be drawn into a financial crisis has affected investor sentiment considerably. The belief that Europe will be the next flashpoint, when most economies of the developed world seem to be stabilising after a prolonged recession, has transformed regional worries into truly global ones. Multilateral institutions including the IMF and the World Bank expect the global economy to grow faster this year than it did during the past two years. However, the recovery is expected to be uneven, with the developed economies witnessing only a muted recovery. The U.S. economy has grown strongly during the past quarter but continues to be beset with high unemployment rates. The news of a possible default by some European countries has drawn attention both to the fragility of global recovery and to the fickle nature of global capital flows.
On Thursday, the Dow Jones industrial average fell below 10,000 for the first time since November. Stock markets across Europe lost as much as 6 per cent of the value. By Friday, the contagion had spread to the Asian markets. The Nikkei in Japan shed 2.9 per cent. Along with the rest of Asia, the Indian stock indices dropped precipitously on Friday. The Sensex went down by 434 points and the Nifty by 126 points. While in India the stock prices recovered somewhat during the subsequent trading sessions, it seems unlikely that the markets will soon regain to touch the high levels they reached in recent times. Last week’s stock price movements around the world once again debunk the decoupling theory, which held that the Asian markets are relatively immune to developments in the U.S. and Europe. In India and other Asian countries, the developments in Europe might trigger a long overdue correction that will bring down the stock prices to realistic levels. For investors and governments a more ominous message is that the problems emanating from the financial markets would once again spill over into the real economies, prolonging the slump and making a full-fledged recovery even more difficult.
45) Cauvery dispute: time for closure
Ramaswamy R. Iyer
The Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal was established in 1990, under the Inter-State Water Disputes Act, at a specific direction of the Supreme Court. Ironically, and despite a constitutional and statutory bar on jurisdiction, the court has made it very difficult for the Tribunal to function in accordance with the Act.
This article has been prompted by the excellent and succinct editorial in The Hindu of February 5, 2010 (“Three years and counting,” http://beta.thehindu.com/opinion/editorial/article100926.ece). It seeks to strengthen the thrust of that editorial.
The first point to note is that the protracted and vexed dispute stands adjudicated through a constitutionally sanctioned process. One had hoped that the award of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal, coming after 17 years of proceedings, would mark the end of the historic dispute. But that was a naïve expectation, given the state of politics in this country. However, let us leave that kind of lament aside as old-fashioned and futile.
The Inter-State Water Disputes Act 1956 (ISWD), which was amended in 2002, does provide for a reference by the parties back to the Tribunal after it gives its final order. The parties to the Cauvery dispute were fully entitled to use that provision. In the normal course, the Tribunal could have disposed of the petitions submitted to it and issued supplementary or clarificatory orders (or revised its Final Order) within three to six months, or at the most a year. Unfortunately, it has not been able to deal with the petitions because the parties have simultaneously gone to the Supreme Court with Special Leave Petitions, and the Supreme Court, having admitted the SLPs, has not yet (in three years’ time) taken them up.
How could the parties go to the Supreme Court with SLPs when there is a clear and explicit bar on the jurisdiction of the courts in the case of a river-water dispute that has been referred to a Tribunal under the ISWD Act? Such a bar is provided for in Article 262 of the Constitution and it is part of the ISWD Act. In other words, it is a constitutionally sanctioned bar. The governments, their Law departments, and their learned and eminent counsel know these provisions very well. How then were the SLPs submitted, and how did the Supreme Court admit them?
In the case of any SLP under Article 136 (whether relating to river-water or any other dispute), the Supreme Court has first to decide in its discretion whether it should grant or deny the requested Special Leave. Special Leave is not automatic. The need for a considered grant or denial of Special Leave would apply to all SLPs. But it was particularly important in this case because of the specific and explicit exclusion of the jurisdiction of the courts. One would have expected that bar to be taken note of and the means of overcoming it gone into before the petitions were admitted.
It is of course possible that this aspect will be examined when the petitions are taken up for detailed hearing. However, it is not clear how the question of jurisdiction will come up at that stage. The petitioners are hardly likely to raise the issue. Perhaps the learned judges themselves will do so. But does not the very admission of the petitions constitute an implicit decision on admissibility? Having admitted them, how can the Supreme Court go into the question of admissibility? Will it then de-admit them?
It may be argued that the bar on the jurisdiction of the courts is not absolute. If so, what are the ways in which the bar can be overcome? Among the possible routes are Articles 32, 131, and 136 of the Constitution.
Article 32 relates to fundamental rights, and it does not seem easy to invoke it in the context of river-water-sharing. The Bangalore Water Users’ Association (BWUA), in fact, invoked that Article in a petition. Among the BWUA’s arguments was the one that the Tribunal’s allocation to Karnataka did not make an adequate provision for Bangalore’s drinking water needs and that this constituted a violation of a fundamental right. That seems to me an argument of doubtful validity, but it is not necessary to go into it here. In the event, the Supreme Court dismissed the BWUA’s petition on the ground of absence of locus standi. The question of fundamental rights did not come up at all.
Article 131 is about Centre-State or inter-State disputes in general, whereas Article 262 is specifically about inter-State river-water disputes. How can a general provision be invoked in a case covered by a specific provision? Besides, clause (2) of Article 262 that enables the barring of the jurisdiction of the courts begins with the words “Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution.” That does not seem to leave recourse to Article 131 open. However, the question whether Article 131 provides a route for an appeal to the Supreme Court against an ISWD Tribunal’s Order did not come up for consideration.
Article 136 is the actual route taken by the three petitioner States in this case. The wording of the Article, and in particular the reference to “any Court or tribunal in the territory of India,” seems to bring the ISWD Tribunals within the purview of the Article. But we cannot forget the specific bar in the ISWD Act in pursuance of Article 262; and that article begins with a “notwithstanding anything in this Constitution” clause. Is that clause over-ridden by Article 136? Is it possible to over-ride a “notwithstanding anything” clause (a non obstante clause)? Does Article 136 carry an unstated super non obstante clause that over-rides the explicit non obstante clause in Article 262? Such questions were not discussed before the petitions were admitted. Perhaps they will come up at a later stage.
Finally, there is a further question of some importance. If a way out of the bar of jurisdiction can be found via Article 32 or 131 or 136 in this case, it can be found in every case. Under what circumstances then will the bar actually operate? Surely a bar that can be removed in every case is not a bar at all. It does appear that the establishment of a route to the Supreme Court against an ISWD Tribunal’s Award via other constitutional provisions will be tantamount to major amendments to Article 262 of the Constitution and the ISWD Act. If such amendments are felt to be needed, should they not be explicitly made in the appropriate manner?
One has heard the argument that judicial review is part of the basic structure and cannot be ousted but that does not apply in this case. Judicial review applies to legislation or executive action. The Tribunal’s award is a judicial decision. In such a case, there can be a review by the same court or an appeal to a higher court. Review by the Tribunal itself is possible, but appeal to a higher court (the Supreme Court) is ruled out by the bar on the jurisdiction of the courts. That bar is sanctioned by an Article of the Constitution. An amendment to the Constitution can be struck down as violating the basic structure of the Constitution, but can an original article of the Constitution itself be held to violate the basic structure?
One must hope that these issues will receive due consideration when the SLPs are taken up. The fact is that in three years’ time the Supreme Court has not found it possible, or has not deemed it fit, to take them up. In the meanwhile, the Tribunal has been unable to deal with the petitions submitted to it. In other words, the Supreme Court has made it very difficult, if not impossible, for the Tribunal to function in accordance with the ISWD Act. There is some irony here because the Tribunal was established in 1990 under a specific direction of the Supreme Court.
(Ramaswamy R. Iyer is a former Secretary for Water Resources in the Government of India.)
46) A universal paradox: can market economy become inclusive?
V. Anil Kumar
Are we buying the catch phrase, inclusiveness, with critical attention?
Of late there has been increased emphasis on inclusiveness in economy, society and polity. The Planning Commission has declared that the goal of the present government is not only enhanced growth but ‘inclusive growth.’ The catchword has been picked up by the media, academia and even sections of civil society. Not only this many reputed universities also have come up with centres aimed at study of social exclusion and inclusive policies. These are most welcome in a society that revels in social hierarchies and inventing inequalities. But given the market economy, procedural democracy and hierarchical society, is such much-wanted inclusion possible? Are we buying this catch phrase of ‘inclusiveness’ with critical attention? That is what it appears to be.
First and foremost the economy is an open market economy which operates, as Marx famously wrote , functions essentially on ever more concentration of capital in fewer and fewer hands. There is a need within the market economy to reduce real wages to withstand competition and this leads to the ever more marginalisation of labour. Therefore the critique of market economy as leading to concentration of capital on one hand and systematically excluding the labour force from participating in the economy is well known. There is however a second aspect to the market economy. This is that as workers participate in the manufacturing, not in agriculture or primary occupations, they are also socialised to come together ever more and therefore market economy that depends on manufactures and factory production socialises labour. The second is a positive aspect. If this is the case what of our ‘inclusive growth’?
First, our growth process is not taking place in manufacture but in the service sector. Therefore the participation of manufacturing and agricultural sectors is marginal. The economy operates by excluding vast majority of people as they do not become factory workers nor are modern avenues available. Given the literacy and education rates, wider participation in the service sector-led growth is less. Secondly even in the service sector, the process of socialisation of labour, coming together, acquiring the consciousness of being labourers and forming associations based on that identity do not happen. Therefore the positive dimension of market economy is not possible either. Corporate work cultures in service sectors do not encourage or equip the workers with the consciousness of being part of a common labour force. Readers can guess what we conclude with: the faster the Indian economy grows, the more exclusionary it becomes. Vast agriculture sector lumbers on the margins as planners and commentators hope and pray for better rains, and less floods, to keep it going and achieving four percent growth target.
Social change
What about the society? Is it becoming inclusive? There might be some positive indicators on this aspect modern economy and enhanced urbanisation are supposed to unpack caste and religious identities and create a more secular society. Some social change indeed has come about at least in certain States in India where the rules of social existence — in terms of caste prejudices, rituals and more than most the joint family — have declined. But for whom and for what extent? For specifically citizens of Indian society the question is how much have they become socially inclusive? Have the caste rules changed in inter-marriage, dining and inter-mingling. This can hardly be said even in urban, metropolitan areas. Interestingly, take the example of matrimonial websites: they began saying ‘simply marry’ and now have ended up saying ‘marry within your community’! So much for the urban India; in the vast spans of rural India caste rules the roost. It is wishful thinking that by opening up economy and increasing its economic pace we increase the pace of social change towards some variety of ‘modernity’, however defined.
The polity
What about the polity? This is an area where we can hope for the better. Yogendra Yadav and his team from the CSDS (Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, Delhi) have been arguing for some time that there has been an incontrovertible increase in the participation of subaltern people in the electoral and democratic processes across the country. The voting rates are increasing, as they say. The present ordinance of the Union government that there should be fifty per cent mandatory reservation for women in local bodies may strengthen the case that we are becoming, in some sense, an inclusive democracy. We can argue that the political enfranchisement of the ‘common person’ is increasing.
The point of this article is that, political enfranchisement is taking place in India without sufficient economic enfranchisement. Whether this political enfranchisement results in an ‘inclusive democracy’ or not, at different levels of the polity, is to be seen. Certainly 50 per cent reservation for women in the Parliament remains elusive. What appears to be happening to the question of ‘inclusiveness’ is that with the widespread visual and print media, along with increasing awareness of the democratic politics, certain kind of ‘political enfranchisement’ is happening. This is reflecting in the increased protests and political disturbances as well. But this is happening at the same time, and because of, ‘economic disenfranchisement’ or lack of economic empowerment.
This paradox is not limited to India. It is the paradox of capitalism everywhere; even where the identity based and other politico-sociological factors play less role. If governments and those in power politically enfranchise people but economically keep them disenfranchised the results need not be particularly happy ones. A biased and socially and spatially skewed economic enfranchisement brings forth its own ‘critical political enfranchisement’ that may be unintended. Neither what we are saying is particularly new nor is this paradox limited to India. There are good reasons to believe in a globalised world that the paradox is universal and those claim forth new ‘inclusive’ mantra may take note of this.
(V. Anil Kumar is Assistant Professor at the Centre for Political Institutions, Governance and Development, Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bangalore.)
47) Exorcising war’s demons, in poetry and prose
Elisabeth Bumiller
Soldier-writers explore the timeless theme of the futility of war.
________________________________________
Most of the writing by combatants has been memoirs that bear witness to battles of their own
The flow of soldiers’ war books will not stop
________________________________________
Brian Turner was focused on staying alive, not poetry, when he served as an infantry team leader in Iraq. But he quickly saw that his experience — “a year of complete boredom punctuated by these very intense moments” — lent itself to the tautness of verse.
The result was a collection called Here, Bullet,with a title poem inspired by Turner’s realisation during combat patrols that he was bait to lure the enemy.
If a body is what you want,
then here is bone and gristle and flesh,
… because here, Bullet,
here is where the world ends, every time.
“Poetry was the perfect vehicle,” said Turner, who had a master’s in fine arts from the University of Oregon before joining the Army. “The page was the place where I could think about what had happened.”
Turner is a literal foot soldier in what might be called the well-written war: a recent outpouring of memoirs, fiction, poetry, blogs and even some readable military reports by combatants in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Soldier-writers have long produced American literature, from Ulysses S. Grant’s memoirs about the Civil War to Norman Mailer’s World War II novel, The Naked and the Dead, to Tim O’Brien’s The Things They Carried, about Vietnam.
The current group is different. As part of a modern all-volunteer force, they explore the timeless theme of the futility of war — but wars that they for the most part support. The books, many written as rites of passage by members of a highly educated young officer corps, are filled with gore, inept commanders and anguish over men lost in combat, but not questions about the conflicts themselves. “They look at war as an aspect of glory, of finding honour,” said O’Brien, who was drafted for Vietnam in 1968 out of Macalester College in St. Paul, Minn. “It’s almost an old-fashioned, Victorian way of looking at war.”
The writers say one goal is to explain the complexities of the wars — Afghan and Iraqi politics, technology, the counterinsurgency doctrine of protecting local populations rather than just killing bad guys — to a wider audience. Their efforts, embraced by top commanders, have even bled into military reports that stand out for their accessible prose.
“The importance of good official writing is so critical in reaching a broader audience to get people to understand what we’re trying to do,” said Capt. Matt Pottinger, a Marine and former reporter for The Wall Street Journal who is a co-author of the report Fixing Intel, an indictment of American intelligence-gathering efforts in Afghanistan released last month. “Even formal military doctrine is well served by a colloquial style of writing.”
The report, overseen by the top military intelligence officer in Afghanistan, Maj. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, is an anecdote-rich argument against intelligence officers who pursue secrets about insurgents but ignore data for winning the war right in front of them — local economics, village politics and tribal power brokers. The report compares the American war in Afghanistan to a political campaign, “albeit a violent one,” and observes, “To paraphrase former Speaker of the House Thomas P. ‘Tip’ O’Neill’s famous quote, ‘all counterinsurgency is local.’”
Another report, an unreleased Army history about the battle of Wanat in July 2008 — the “Black Hawk Down” of Afghanistan — unfolds in stiffer prose but builds a strong narrative. Written by Douglas R. Cubbison, a military historian at the Army’s Combat Studies Institute at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., the draft report lays bare the failures of an American unit to engage the local population in a village in eastern Afghanistan — “these people, they disgust me,” one soldier is quoted as saying — and graphically tells the story of the firefight that killed nine Americans.
Most of the writing by combatants has been memoirs that bear witness to battles of their own. Craig M. Mullaney, a former Ranger and Army captain, writes in The Unforgiving Minute of a 2003 ambush on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border that killed one of his men, Evan W. O’Neill.
“Small-calibre rounds dented the Humvees around me, but it was strangely silent, as if someone had pressed the mute button. ... All I could remember were those eyes, glacial-blue, like my brother’s. There’s no way O’Neill’s dead. This wasn’t a game or an exercise or a movie; these were real soldiers with real blood and real families waiting back home. What had I done wrong?”
Mullaney, who has left the Army and is now a Pentagon official handling policy for Central Asia, said he wrote his book in part as catharsis, and as a way of telling Pvt. 1st Class O’Neill’s parents what had happened to their son. “I had a lot of ghosts I was still wrestling with,” he said. “I thought by writing I could make some sense of this jumble of experiences and memories and doubts and fears.”
Nathaniel C. Fick, a former Marine officer who wrote of taking heavy fire during the 2003 invasion of Iraq in One Bullet Away, had his own troubles coming home. Fick, now the chief executive of the Centre for a New American Security, a military research group in Washington, also appears in Evan Wright’s book (and the HBO miniseries) Generation Kill, based on Wright’s experience as a Rolling Stone reporter embedded with Fick’s platoon.
Fick, a Dartmouth graduate who applied to graduate school after leaving the Marines, describes getting a call from an admissions officer.
“‘Mr. Fick, we read your application and liked it very much. But a member of our committee read Evan Wright’s story about your platoon in Rolling Stone. You’re quoted as saying, ‘the bad news is, we won’t get much sleep tonight; the good news is, we get to kill people.’ She paused, as if waiting for me to disavow the quote. I was silent, and she went on .... ‘Could you please explain your quote for me?’ ...
‘You mean, will I climb your clock tower and pick people off with a hunting rifle?’
It was her turn to be silent.
‘No, I will not. Do I feel compelled to explain myself to you? I don’t.’”
Other books started as soldier blogs, at least before commanders shut them, among them My War by Colby Buzzell, a former machine gunner in Iraq. Another soldier’s blog, shut by the Army in 2008 but to be published as a book in April, is Kaboom: Embracing the Suck in a Savage Little War, by Matt Gallagher, a former Army officer in Iraq.
There are far fewer books by women, but one of them, Love My Rifle More than You by Kayla Williams, an Arabic-speaking former sergeant in a military intelligence company, is particularly critical of the military. (Williams writes of how she was instructed to verbally humiliate a naked Iraqi prisoner in Mosul.)
So far there are relatively few novels, although The Mullah’s Storm by Tom Young, a flight engineer in the Air National Guard, is to be published in the fall. The story is about a soldier shot down in Afghanistan.
O’Brien, whose own memoir, If I Die in a Combat Zone, Box Me Up and Ship Me Home was published in 1973, said that the dearth of novels did not surprise him. His first war novel, Going After Cacciato was not published until 1978. The Things They Carried was published in 1990. Soldiers need more time to explore “what happened inside,” O’Brien said — suggesting that the flow of their war books will not stop anytime soon.
48) Prosperity undermined by western farming
John Vidal
Study claims modern farming threatens nomadic cattle herding.
Nomadic herders who move their cattle ceaselessly across some of the harshest environments in the world in search of grazing land are vital for Africa’s economic prosperity, but their way of life is being undermined by governments, conservationists and large-scale farmers, according to a study.
Millions of hectares of land traditionally used by pastoralists in Ethiopia, Senegal, Mali, Chad, Kenya and other sub-Saharan countries have been lost to sedentary farming and conservation over the last 50 years, say the authors of Modern and Mobile, published on Monday by the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED).
But by encouraging a move to a more westernised model of farming, governments are mistakenly assuming outputs from animals — for export as well as for local consumption — will increase when the opposite appears to be true.
“The slow but inexorable advance of family farms, combined with large scale farming, is swallowing up vast areas. In east Africa the loss of land to national parks, game reserves, hunting blocks and conservation severely restricts mobility. Lands that they have traditionally been used are no longer available,” the study says.
Restrictions on mobility is leading to conflict between pastoralists and farmers, says the book: “Moving is now becoming a serious problem. Access to water and markets is increasingly difficult and the profitability of livestock-keeping is being critically undermined. Poverty, resource degradation and conflict are increasing.”
But the study finds Africa’s estimated 50m pastoralists adapting rapidly to the modern world. “[They] download the latest market prices for cattle on their mobile phones, use cheap Chinese motorbikes to reach distant herds or lost camels, and trek their livestock thousands of kilometres by foot, truck or ship to trade them internationally,” says co-author Cedd Hesse. The report also says the nomadic cattle of west Africa, Ethiopia and Kenya produce more and better quality meat and generate more cash per hectare than “modern” Australian and American ranches where animals remain in one place.
Unlike other farmers in sub-Saharan Africa who are devastated by increasingly frequent droughts, they are also proving more resilient to climate change and are generating huge economic benefits. “Harsh, arid and unpredictable environments are not obstacles to pastoralists as they would almost inevitably be to other farmers,” says co-author Saverio Kratli.
The authors urge governments and foreign donors to reassess and protect pastoralism. “The financial inputs are minimal but the benefits rapidly extend beyond the herders and their communities to enrich the lives of millions of people,” says Hesse.
— © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
Corrections and clarifications
* * A sentence in the first paragraph of “A difficult choice” (Editorial, February 8, 2010) was “For the cooking fuels — kerosene and LPG — it calls for a nuanced approach but even here an immediate price rice of about Rs.100 for an LPG cylinder and Rs.6 for a litre of kerosene sold through the public distribution system (PDS) is suggested.” It’s “price rise”.
* * The last sentence in “Facing up to Gaza truths” (Editorial, February 8, 2010) was “Finally, in an attack on a civilian occupied U.N. compound on January 6, 2010, the IDF massacred 40 Palestinians ….” The year should have been 2009.
* * The second paragraph of an article “Cracks in Hindutva brotherhood” (Op-Ed, February 6, 2010) said that Abu Azmi is a Samajwadi Party (SP) MP. He is an SP MLA (Maharashtra). He represented Uttar Pradesh in the Rajya Sabha from November 2002 to November 2008.
* * In connection with the last line in an article “Water, aspirations, nature” (Op-Ed, February 5, 2010), its author Ramaswamy R. Iyer says: “The full title of [18th Century Irish satirist] Swift’s pamphlet (1729) is ‘A Modest Proposal: For Preventing the Children of Poor People in Ireland from Being a Burden to Their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Publick’. The ‘modest proposal’ was that the children should be sold to the rich as food. By citing that pamphlet, the last paragraph of the article was intended to be a piece of grim irony.
“In the penultimate line, the phrase ‘not with a whimper but a bang’ was an inversion of the last line of T. S. Eliot’s poem ‘The Hollow Men’.”
* * The heading of a report “Jaitley wants talks with Pakistan to be open-ended” (Delhi, February 6, 2010, page 10) was incorrect. What Mr. Jaitley said was that talks would be open-ended and not prioritised to discuss a particular subject, say, terrorism.
* * The strapline of a report “Maratha outfits to intensify agitation on Shivjayanti” (February 4, 2010) was “They are demanding reservation for Maharashtrians in education and employment”. The Staff Reporter clarifies: “This is misleading. The outfits are demanding reservation for members of the Maratha caste and not all Maharashtrians.”
49) Set General Fonseka free
If the combined forces of the opposition in Sri Lanka showed appalling political judgment in fielding retired Army general Sarath Fonseka as their presidential candidate, the government has returned the favour through an act that is as miscalculated and reckless as it is authoritarian and ugly. The decision to arrest and court martial the former Army Chief, and the manner in which his arrest was carried out, has shocked everyone who values democracy. Even at face value, the allegations made against General Fonseka are dubious, with the government apparently confused about what exactly he was guilty of (other than vaingloriousness, political ambition, paranoia, and foot-in-the-mouth disease, which are not really prosecutable offences). In fact, the official versions have been such as to challenge credulity: while a press release posted at the Army’s website informs us that General Fonseka has been “taken into military custody on charges of alleged fraudulent acts and military offences,” a government Minister has accused him of “direct contact with opposition political parties” amounting to conspiracy (while he was Army Commander, Chief of Defence Staff, and member of the Security Council), and the director-general of the Media Centre for National Security has spoken darkly of charges of plotting a military coup and conspiring to assassinate President Mahinda Rajapaksa. To the public in Sri Lanka and abroad, what all this signals is a witch-hunt that makes no political sense.
True, the general has been provocative beyond normal limits. Instead of accepting the people’s decisive verdict, he has made false allegations that the presidential election was stolen from him. He has hurled accusations of war crimes against field commanders who served under him in the 34 month-long-war against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. He has spoken of an official plot to assassinate him. He has even given hints of political blackmail by saying that upon his death an affidavit containing the government’s ‘secrets’ would be made public. Statesmanship demanded that these provocations be treated as acts of political folly born of failure and frustration. President Rajapaksa, after all, is in an extremely strong position. Following his 17+ percentage point triumph in the presidential contest, he expects his party and alliance to make substantial gains in the parliamentary election that will be held in the first half of April. Sri Lanka, in the post-LTTE era, needs normalcy, reconciliation, a just and sustainable political solution to the Tamil question, and development of all regions starting with the North — not the politics of vendetta, more divisiveness and strife, and further politicisation of the military. Assuming that President Rajapaksa was persuaded or pressured by the hawks around him to go against his better political judgment, he must act boldly to reverse course and set General Fonseka free.
50) BAE gets away lightly
BAE Systems, the British weapons manufacturer, is to pay criminal fines totalling approximately £285 million. This deal closes a coordinated eight-year investigation by the British Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ) into longstanding allegations of bribery, slush funds, and unrecorded payments to clients. The U.K. levy of £30 million is a national record for a corporate criminal fine. BAE has accepted only the U.K. charge of failing to keep accounting records and the U.S. charge of not instituting appropriate anti-bribery preventive measures. The issues date as far back as the firm’s 1985 al-Yamamah deal to supply military equipment to Saudi Arabia, and include more recent contracts with Tanzania, the Czech Republic, South Africa, and Hungary. BAE had apparently been bracing itself for fines of up to £1 billion and would have been under no illusions as to the damage its reputation, as well as that of the British government, faced in any criminal trial.
Most importantly, BAE has not admitted any corruption allegations. The plea-bargained settlement has been severely criticised by NGOs like the Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT) and by British MPs. Public accusations have been made that Prime Minister Tony Blair caved in to Saudi pressure to halt the British criminal investigation into the £43-billion al-Yamamah affair. CAAT says the fine is a ‘tiny price’ in relation to the value of the contracts. Preliminary English criminal procedures against a key BAE agent, the Austrian Count Alfons Mensdorff-Pouilly, have also been abandoned. The collapse of those proceedings has, however, enabled The Observer to reveal that the SFO prepared detailed allegations of systematic procedures through which BAE paid bribes to foreign politicians and officials. The company may have escaped the blacklisting that would have followed a criminal conviction for bribery and its shareholders will no doubt be relieved that it can continue selling weaponry and related equipment around the world. But the clear implication is that none of the parties involved, namely BAE, the British government, and the U.S. government, wanted to see the evidence tested in the criminal courts. It seems that states are terrified of pursuing even serious accusations of corporate criminality.
51) The blame game around food prices
C.P. Chandrasekhar
The special meeting of Chief Ministers convened by the Centre indicates that food price inflation remains worrisome. But at the meet the problem was underplayed and little of substance emerged.
With food price inflation still running at close to 18 per cent, the UPA government at the Centre has been forced to recognise that it constitutes a problem that deserves as much or more attention than the objective of achieving a 9 or 10 per cent rate of growth. But there is little of substance that it appears to be doing to rein in prices. In fact, the effort seems to be to declare the problem as being partly unavoidable and temporary and as partly the result of acts of commission or omission of the State governments or of non-Congress segments of the Central government.
This appears to have been the intent also of the special meeting of Chief Ministers convened in Delhi to ostensibly discuss the food price inflation and work out solutions. The outcome of the meeting is indeed surprising. After getting the heads of 24 State governments together, the Prime Minister in his inaugural address declared that the worst was over on the food inflation front and that the government would be able to stabilise food prices soon.
Having thus induced a sense of complacency about future price trends, the Centre chose to identify the inflation that has been with us for the past few months as being the collateral fallout of policies and developments elsewhere in the domestic and world economy. Among the reasons reportedly cited for the price rise in the course of deliberations at the conference were increases in the minimum support price for farm produce instituted to help the farming community, increases in international prices, increases in demand “due to the increase in purchasing power” resulting from higher growth, excess liquidity in the system, “inefficiencies” in marketing of farm produce and the high cost of intermediation. While action to deal with some of these has been promised in the past and that promise reiterated at the meet, many of the factors seen as driving inflation are either out of the Centre’s control or otherwise positive economic outcomes that cannot be countered.
This amounts to an implicit declaration that food price inflation of some intensity is inevitable. Hence the principal outcome of the Chief Ministers’ meet was a set of proposals aimed at monitoring inflation so as to act early whenever it threatens to be excessive and to deal with inflation-inducing supply constraints in some commodities, through long-term efforts at strengthening agriculture. Towards this end, the meeting constituted a Standing Core Group to suggest measures to deal with price rise, propose steps for improving the public distribution system and the procurement of foodgrains and find ways of reducing the gap between farm gate prices and retail prices. For the long term, the Standing Group will also suggest measures for increasing agricultural production and productivity, including long-term policies for sustained agricultural growth.
Besides the Union Finance Minister, the Union Agriculture Minister, the Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission and the Chairman of Prime Minister’s Economic Advisory Council, the Group will comprise the Chief Ministers of Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal.
While all efforts at consulting with the States on issues of economic importance are laudable, the constitution of this committee seems to be motivated by political considerations rather than a search for improved economic management. To start with, a joint committee of the Centre and the States sends out the signal that the governments in the States are as much responsible for allowing inflation to reach the levels it has reached. Second, it underlines the argument which has been made for some time now that the States need to do more to help the Centre combat the current inflation and prevent the recurrence of such episodes of inflation in future. In fact, the Prime Minister, who had earlier argued that the States were not doing enough to deal with speculation, attributed the wide gap between farm gate and retail prices partly to the proliferation of State and local taxes, cesses and levies. When claiming that taxes on food items added an additional cost burden of as much as 10-15 per cent at the retail level, he was implicitly suggesting that the States should forego revenues to neutralise some of the price increase. Besides this, he made a case for enhancing competition at the retail level by opening up the retail trade, though the evidence elsewhere is that this merely increases concentration at the retail level and widens rather than reduces trade margins.
All this helps divert attention from the longer term and more recent policies of the Central government that were responsible for generating the current high levels of commodity price inflation even when demand-supply imbalances are restricted to a few commodities. While there is some consensus on the role of speculation in driving inflation, official statements ignore the importance of liberalised marketing arrangements, liberalised futures trading, long-term supply-demand imbalances resulting from the neglect of agriculture and errors in supply management in the case of commodities like sugar in ensuring that speculative expectations of a rise in prices are realised. Moreover, with its emphasis on subsidy reduction and targeting of food distributed through the public distribution system, the Centre has paid little attention to enhancing the spread and penetration of the PDS, making it a less potent instrument to combat speculation. In fact, many States have complained that they have not been allocated adequate supplies to cater to the demands of the above poverty line population, undermining the role of the PDS as a safeguard against inflation in open market prices. Given this background, it is unclear why the State governments should accept the Centre’s reading of the intensity, temporal spread and determinants of the current inflation and endorse the policies it recommends to deal with the problem.
The problem is unlikely to just go away as the Prime Minister expects because the foreign exchange reserve the country has accumulated, which facilitates imports to augment supplies, is also not an effective antidote against inflation. There are two difficulties here. First, as the RBI’s recent policy review statement notes, “the global rates of increase in the prices of sugar, cereals and edible oils are now appreciably higher than domestic rates,” so that the opportunity to use imports to contain domestic food prices is limited. Second, even where imports can be resorted to, managing distribution to reach supplies to where they are needed is not easy given the limited spread of the public distribution system. It is the resulting erosion of its ability to ensure low inflation while pushing for reasonable growth that the government’s anti-inflation propaganda seeks to conceal.
While leaders of the Opposition parties and Chief Ministers of the States ruled by non-Congress parties have declared in the conference and outside that the current inflation is largely a result of the Centre’s policies, their participation in the centrally driven effort to rein in inflation does amount to playing into the hands of the Centre. Rather than serve as honorary advisers to the Centre, the State governments would do well to devise their own strategies to protect the vulnerable sections from the adverse effects of the recent price increase and ensure that inflation is kept in control in the future. They could then support each other in their effort to get the Centre to fall in line, both in terms of adopting similar policies as well as providing the States the resources needed to pursue their strategies. This, rather than participation in meetings and committees in which they are talked down to, would be much more in their interest.
52) The drowning Sundarbans, receding Gangotri, excessive and untimely rain in Maharashtra and unprecedented droughts in Madhya Pradesh. Seen in isolation, these events may seem like random coincidences. Put it all together and the story that emerges is of an impending catastrophe. As mankind raced towards industrial and consumption driven development goals, the concept of sustainability got lost somewhere along the way.
While we, the common people, might think that climate change is something that only the people living in the coastal regions and politicians have to worry about, the truth is quite the opposite. Everything that we depend on for our day today sustenance is directly affected by how the climate evolves over time. Be it the wheat and rice crops that get ruined due to untimely rains, thereby pushing up the prices, or the healthcare situation in the country, that gets worse due to the increasing cases of vector borne diseases.
The Copenhagen Accord has failed to recognise this. Led by the world’s most powerful leaders, 192 nation leaders came together at Copenhagen Summit but left without making binding commitments. Ironically it is the poor and marginalised people, who have not contributed to climate change, that are and will be the most affected by climate change. The Kyoto Protocol was symbolically an important step, but it failed to deliver a major effort toward greenhouse gas reductions. In the absence of a new mindset, the Copenhagen Accord will mean more years of the same waiting game. Countries will continue free-riding. While global temperatures continue to rise, glaciers melt and ultimately people’s livelihoods and lives are lost.
The world needed a fair, ambitious and ‘operationally binding political deal’ to be reached at Copenhagen. We have lesser time left for drastic global action to reduce Green House Gas emissions. The Himalayan glaciers may not be melting as fast as we were told, but for common people and for politicians who represent them, climate is changing and the impacts are there for us to see.
That we need to do something urgently to slow this, is a well known fact now. But ‘what can be done’ is a fact on which consensus has so far been elusive.
The Climate Summit in Copenhagen was the 15th attempt by the world leaders to come to a common ground to discuss and possibly resolve the situation. However, if the same blame game continues it will be near impossible to resolve and truly tackle this complex problem.
The developed world needs to understand and acknowledge the development needs and aspirations of the countries like India, China and Brazil. Especially in the light of the fact that with its current population India still accounts for only 5 per cent of the global emissions, whereas the U.S. is responsible for 20 per cent. The disparity was much higher in the past.
The U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) presents us not only with a global platform to voice our concerns but also a democratic platform where powerful and less powerful countries can talk on equitable terms. Any move forward from Copenhagen still needs to ensure that developed countries, like U.S., make binding commitments that are fair and ambitious at the same time. Furthermore, developing countries are provided enough financial and technological support to ensure a smooth and viable transition to low carbon growth societies.
From India’s domestic perspective, the current times present a phenomenal opportunity to start building a low carbon economy. By doing this, India will not only be able to sustain its economic and industrial growth but also ensure that its social developments targets like rural electrification are met in a climate friendly way. The battle, however, will have to be fought on two fronts — ‘Improving efficiencies in the existing infrastructure’ and ‘speeding up the implementation of new projects’ like ‘Sustainable Habitat Mission’ and ‘Solar Mission.’
It is only when India takes a leadership position in its global as well as domestic approach that the ‘developed’ will be shamed into correcting their own wrongdoings. It is critical that we, as a nation, take a stand in post Copenhagen and lead the global climate debate; strongly putting our point across, without getting intimidated or influenced by international pressure.
Needless to say that the benefits of these efforts would be phenomenal, both for the world economy and our own as well. Ultimately, every year of delay in our addressing the climate change situation results in a loss of close to $ 500 billion.
(Supriya Sule is a Member of Parliament, Lok Sabha, and Chairperson of the Parliamentarians’ Group on Millennium Development Goals, a CLRA — Centre for Legislative Research and Advocacy — initiative.)
53) U.S. climate monitoring service gets go-ahead
Suzanne Goldenberg
The Obama administration delivered a vote of confidence in climate science on Tuesday by setting up a service to study and report on global warming.
It will put scientists and data from the national weather service and various departments of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) under one roof in Washington DC.
Administration officials described Noaa Climate Services, which will be accessible to the public via its website www.climate.gov, as “one-stop shopping” for business, the public and officials seeking information on climate change.
They added it could help shore up the public’s faith in climate science after errors in what was supposed to be the scientific gold standard, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s reports, and the exposure of hundreds of emails showing efforts to evade requests for data and apparent attempts to cover up flawed climate information.
“We are the world’s largest library of data on climate change,” said Gary Locke, the commerce secretary who has overall charge of NOAA. “Creating this office will help us provide leadership on more deliberate research on climate monitoring and assessment and doing it in a much more co-ordinated fashion so everyone will be able to see exactly what Noaa does and the climate service does.” The proposed reorganisation will not require additional funding but it will still need to be authorised by Congress.
Jane Lubchenco, who as head of NOAAa is one of the administration’s most prominent scientists, noted the new U.S. climate site will feature constantly updated data on temperature, carbon dioxide concentration and sea level, which will be readily available to scientists and the public.
‘NOAA is committed to openness to making available all the data it collects freely and accessibly,” she said. “The new climate portal should make it even easier for the public to access and be able to examine for themselves the information that goes into various assessments.”
She said that NOAA had become an increasingly valued resource for business and planners.
54) Confronting suicide by train
Noah Bierman
Steve Vale has to walk only 45 seconds beyond his driveway to get to the train tracks where his daughter killed herself 17 months ago.
“You could almost reach out and touch them,” Vale says, gazing at the metal rails.
He is standing next to a FIVE-foot-tall rusted fence, easily penetrable through gaps and tears, flush against the nation’s busiest passenger rail line.
Suicide by train, though an inherently public act, is in many ways a taboo topic, rarely reported in the media and seldom discussed openly. The rail industry has long considered the phenomenon unfortunate but unavoidable.
Now, the Federal Railroad Administration is challenging that notion.
It has funded an effort, the first of its kind, to tally train suicides as part of a study into whether and how more of them could be prevented. The study, now in its fourth year and set for release next year, looks more closely at fences and other barriers, which are often low and rickety, if they exist at all, along the nation’s rail beds.
There are 300 to 500 train suicides a year, according to the study’s preliminary findings. In Massachusetts, 15 people were killed on the tracks in 2008, the most recent year for which federal data are available, though the data do not indicate how many of those were suicides.
Vale, a 56-year-old retiree, hears trains day and night: long and lumbering freight trains, six-car MBTA commuter trains, and Amtrak Acela trains that thunder by at up to 150 miles per hour, travelling between Boston and Washington, DC.
If he could afford to move his family away from these constant reminders of the worst day in their lives, he would. “It’s like a jet. It shakes the house.”
Even before the death of his 21-year-old daughter, Vale had written legislators asking for better maintained and more substantial barriers. He has no conclusive evidence that they would have saved his daughter’s life, only strong feelings that vulnerable people, including children looking for shortcuts and adults who are not in a rational frame of mind, could be helped by better barricades.
At first glance, physical deterrents may appear useless in stopping people who want to end their lives. But there is significant evidence that taking away or obstructing the means for people to kill themselves can defuse self-destructive impulses, which often occur in moments of extreme anguish or stress.
“When you reduce access to a highly lethal method, overall, suicide rates go down,” said Matthew Miller, a Harvard professor and specialist in suicide prevention.
For example, the presence of a gun in the home multiplies the risk that people will kill themselves by a factor of as much as 10, with the highest risk found in homes where children and teenagers have access to loaded, unlocked guns. And instances of bridge suicide drop substantially when engineers build architectural barricades to prevent jumps.
Suicide rates in Britain dropped significantly in the 1960s after coal gas, used for stoves and home heating, was replaced with less toxic natural gas. By eliminating that means of suicide, the nation saw an overall 30 per cent drop in suicides, suggesting that people who might have tried to kill themselves with coal gas did not necessarily seek out another means.
The effect of train barriers has not been studied. And there are legitimate questions about whether U.S. railroads could ever be cordoned off and maintained well enough to limit access.
But the reflexive refrain from many in the rail industry, that little can be done, avoids grappling with the true moral quandary, Miller said.
European rails have been more aggressive in experimenting with moats, hedges, high fences, or electric gates that rise up on platforms when trains leave the station, said Alan L. Berman executive director of the American Association of Suicidology, which is performing the federal rail suicide study under a grant.
In addition to documenting suicides for the first time, Berman’s team is in the midst of conducting 60 psychological autopsies of train suicide victims in an effort to learn about their lives and motivation, to gain insight about how their actions might have been prevented.
“The individual railroads themselves are all over the map in terms of ... focusing on the problem,” Berman said.
Some in the industry worry that finding a solution means adding more cost and responsibility, he said. Putting up barricades all over the country would not be feasible, he said, but the group may suggest testing barriers in targeted areas where prevention is most likely to be successful.
Most of the nation’s tracks have no barriers. And there is no standard for the type or height of fencing used in places that have them. About one-third of the commuter rail in Massachusetts is fenced in, with an emphasis around parks, schools, high-population areas, and those with repeat trespassing incidents.
Neighbours often cut through them to create shortcuts into town, and responsibility for maintaining them is split among rail entities, town governments, private companies, and school districts.
The track next to Vale’s home is owned by the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, but the fence is maintained by Amtrak, which was required to build it as part of the federal approval in 2000 to run the high-speed Acela trains on electrified tracks. Vale said he has been volleyed back and forth among the MBTA, Amtrak, and his local legislator when asking questions about the fence and the rail.
A spokesman for Amtrak, Clifford Cole, said recently that workers had been out to inspect the Mansfield fences. In recent weeks, after the Globe’s inquiries, the chain link near Vale’s house was replaced by a slightly higher fence and the gaps were eliminated. Other MBTA fences are maintained by a private company that runs commuter rail for the MBTA, the Massachusetts Bay Commuter Railroad Co.
“Do people go up and down the tracks looking for people or fence issues? They don’t,” said Scott Farmelant, a spokesman for the company. “It’s not practical.”
Mass Bay Commuter and the MBTA teamed up for the first time last year with Samaritans, a nonprofit group, to launch an awareness campaign that includes signs at commuter stations with a toll-free help line.
Sign campaigns have been used more often nationally in recent years, but their effectiveness has not been measured, Berman said.
Still, the signs in Massachusetts have drawn callers and are believed to have saved lives, said Roberta Hurtig, director of Samaritans.
There were no signs near the section of track where Elizabeth Mary Vale committed suicide after a long battle with depression and several unsuccessful attempts to take her life.
On the night of Sept. 6, 2008, the college student drove 25 minutes from her Attleboro home to the end of her parents’ street, a few blocks from Mansfield Station. She parked her car next to the fence.
“This was a vigorous, bright, loving young woman,” her father said.
It is unclear how she gained access to the tracks, but the gaps in the fence were wide enough for most adults to pass through easily and the fence is low enough to climb. She was hit by a southbound commuter train, which had just left Mansfield Station, according to police.
Vale said his daughter’s suicide note, and attempts she made that day to reach her therapist, indicated she was wavering. Vale has no proof that a better barrier would have deterred her.
“We’re not saying it definitely could have,” he said, “but we believe she would not have.”
55) Faith lobby and secular laws
Hasan Suroor
Can religious bodies claim a privileged status and demand exemption from secular laws, especially those intended to prevent discrimination?
While across the Channel in France secularists are on the march and busy banning any hint of religiosity in public, in Britain the wind appears to blowing in exactly the opposite direction with the religious establishment setting the agenda. Its latest triumph is winning an extraordinary exemption from a new equality law which would make it illegal for employers to discriminate on the basis of people’s sexuality.
The exemption means that religious bodies would be able to refuse — with impunity — to hire gays even for jobs which have no bearing on religion thus closing a whole range of employment opportunities for them. It will also allow foster care homes run by religious charities to decline to place children with same-sex couples.
As commentators have pointed out the bill was never designed to impinge on the right of religious groups to apply faith criteria to religious jobs such as priests, imams or pundits but simply to clarify which jobs should be open to all irrespective of their beliefs, gender or sexuality.
The government was forced to retreat after a revolt by bishops in the House of Lords and a strong public protest from the Pope who denounced Britain’s equality laws as a threat to religious freedom.
In a speech, announcing his visit to Britain in the autumn, he accused his prospective hosts of violating “natural law” and imposing “unjust limitations on the freedom of religious communities to act in accordance with their beliefs.” He urged a group of visiting Catholic bishops from England and Wales to stand firm in defence of their religious beliefs that, he suggested, were under threat in Britain.
The Pope’s intervention, which emboldened the Church of England and other faith groups to step up their opposition to the bill , surprised observers. One newspaper noted that it was “highly unusual” for a foreign head of state to intervene so directly in the legislative process of another country.
But there’s a more fundamental issue at the heart of this debate: can religious bodies claim (and be granted as has happened in this case) a privileged status and demand exemption from secular laws, especially those intended to prevent discrimination on grounds of religious or other prejudices?
Government’s “surrender”
“The question the Pope seems to skate over is whether religious communities can legitimately choose for themselves their own constitutional arrangements. The Pope’s view is a misunderstanding of that principle..... Laws that subject religion to the same responsibilities on discrimination as civil society are not a violation of religious liberty because they do not penalise religion,” wrote The Times’ commentator on religious affairs Ruth Gledhill.
Liberal opinion across the religious divide is incensed over what it sees as the government’s “surrender” to the faith lobby to win its support in the coming general elections. There is a substantial Catholic vote (almost five million) and which way it goes could influence the outcome.
Allegations of political opportunism apart, the exemption, it seems, could be in breach of the European Union’s employment directive. According to the National Secular Society, the original bill was designed to bring the U.K. law in line with the EU directive and by agreeing to the changes forced by faith groups the government has put itself on a “collision course” with the EU.
“This could lead to the Government facing prosecution by the European Court of Justice,” warned the Society’s Executive Director Keith Porteous Wood announcing the launch of an online public petition against the changes and the Pope’s planned visit.
Ironically, while church attendance across Britain is reported to be in free-fall (the Church of England feels specially neglected by its flock) religious groups and individuals have become increasingly vocal in recent years in opposing laws that they see as being inconsistent with their own beliefs.
Two years ago, Britain’s Catholic church nearly derailed a landmark legislation allowing scientists to create hybrid embryos in order to find cure for diseases like Alzheimer’s and multiple sclerosis. It portrayed the legislation as a “monstrous attack” on Catholic beliefs and urged Catholic MPs and ministers to “act according to their Catholic convictions” when voting on it.
Invoking their “religious conscience,” three senior cabinet ministers threatened to resign if they were forced to support it plunging the government into a crisis. And, in the end, they had their way as the government was compelled to allow a free vote on several key clauses.
Meanwhile, state-funded faith schools that are effectively licensed to discriminate against the children of taxpayers of other faiths are proliferating in the name of multiculturalism with Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs all drawing on public money to run denominational institutions.
As we go to press, there are reports that a judge is to be investigated by the Judicial Complaints Office for giving a lenient sentence to an accused because he was a “religious” man!
Suspending his jail sentence, the judge told him: “I am going to suspend this sentence for the period of two years based on the fact that you are a religious person.... and you know this is not acceptable behaviour.”
The judge in question is former Prime Minister Tony Blair’s wife Cherie, a practising Catholic who apparently had a huge influence on her husband’s decision to convert to Catholic faith.
Ironically, the accused committed the offence (he punched another man in the face) as he came out of a mosque after offering namaaz!
56) Citizens’ handbooks for every child in France
Kim Willsher
French children are to be given a “citizen’s handbook” to teach them to be better republicans, as part of national identity measures announced by the government on Monday.
Schools will be ordered to fly the French flag and to have a copy of the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen in every classroom.
The measures, announced by the French Prime Minister, Francois Fillon, are the first to emerge from the country’s controversial debate on national identity.
Under new rules, immigrants who come to live in France, who since 2007 have had to sign a contract of welcome and integration, will have to take part in a more solemn ceremony to become French citizens. They will also be expected to demonstrate a better command of the French language and a greater knowledge of the “values of the republic.” All candidates will be required to sign a “charter” outlining their rights and responsibilities.
Lessons for immigrant parents, currently being tested in 12 regions, will be introduced across the country from September.
“The emphasis will be put on the respect for the values of the republic ... notably the principle of equality between men and women ... and the level of knowledge of the French language,” said Mr. Fillon.
— © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
Corrections and clarifications
* * A missing letter! The heading of a report (Some editions, February 8, 2010, page 1) was “Fight grounded after hoax call”.
* * *
It is the policy of The Hindu to correct significant errors as soon as possible. Please specify the edition (place of publication), date and page.
The Readers’ Editor’s office can be contacted by
Telephone: +91-44-28418297 (11 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday to Friday);
Fax: +91-44-28552963;
E-mail: readerseditor@thehindu.co.in
Mail: Readers’ Editor, The Hindu, Kasturi Buildings,
859 & 860 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002, India.
All communication must carry the full postal address and telephone number.
No personal visits.
The Terms of Reference for the Readers’ Editor are on www.thehindu.com
Printer friendly page
57) Moving forward cautiously
What separates affirmative action from discrimination is, sometimes, no more than a thin line. While Clause (1) of Article 15 of the Constitution of India bars discrimination “against any citizen on grounds only of religion,” Clause (4) specifically allows the State to make “any special provision for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes.” Large sections of Muslims are no doubt socially and educationally backward, and need the constitutionally-enabled special provision for reservation in education and employment. However, the challenge is to identify these backward sections by adopting a system that does not amount to extending the reservation benefits solely on the ground of religion, which is barred under the Constitution. In the case of the majority Hindu community, socially and economically backward castes, subject to some regional variations, have been identified for reservation benefits as socially and economically backward classes. The absence of an easily identifiable and permanent label akin to caste complicates matters for religious minorities. But social classes and vocational groups among the minorities whose counterparts in the majority community are regarded as backward should have access to the same reservation benefits. However, without a proper assessment of the social and educational conditions of different sections of Muslims, any ad hoc provision made by the State governments will be open to legal challenges.
In Andhra Pradesh, a four per cent reservation for selected sections of Muslims was made through the Andhra Pradesh Reservation in Favour of Socially and Educationally Backward Classes of Muslims Act, 2007, on the basis of the report of the A.P. Commission for Backward Classes. However, the Andhra Pradesh High Court found the Act “religion-specific” and the report of the Commission procedurally flawed. However, just as reservation benefits cannot be granted on grounds only of religion, they cannot also be held back on grounds of religion. The Scheduled Castes, who have suffered oppression in Hindu society, and the Scheduled Tribes, who have remained outside the social mainstream, fall under a different category of reservations, and the issue of extending the SC status to converts to other religions remains unresolved. However, there is no reason why affirmative action and reservations granted to the backward classes among the Hindus should not be extended to similarly placed sections among Muslims and other religious minorities. Instead of resorting to hasty measures that may not stand judicial scrutiny, the Centre and the States must formulate a comprehensive reservation scheme for the socially and educationally backward classes belonging to all religions including Islam, taking into consideration the recommendations of the Ranganath Mishra Commission.
58) Endangered beauty
The inclusion of Puntius denisonii, a strikingly beautiful fish found in the Kerala segment of the Western Ghats, in the IUCN Red List is an important step in the struggle to conserve the biodiversity of the hotspot. The endemic 15-cm-long shoaling species, known locally as “Miss Kerala” and commonly as the Denison barb, is sought after by aquarium enthusiasts for its attractive colouration. It has a flaming red streak running from its snout across part of the body. Exceptional good looks seem to have imperilled this inhabitant of fast-flowing streams to the point that the IUCN says it is now vulnerable. The deterioration of its habitat, already fragmented and restricted to a few rivers — notably the Cheenkannipuzha (a tributary of the Valapattanam river), Achankovil, and Chaliyar — poses as serious a challenge as the growing demand from the globalised ornamental fish market. For want of a monitoring mechanism, the Denison barbs are being massively harvested even in reserve forest areas. Fortunately, recognising the vulnerability of this fish to extinction in the wild, the Kerala government has initiated some action to curb unrestricted capture and export.
The scientific estimate of freshwater fish diversity in the Kerala segment of the Western Ghats is of the order of 207 species, including food, ornamental, and sport fishes. Many of these are under threat. Unfortunately, harvesting and trade in fish is not monitored closely, as in the case of other wildlife. This lacuna is highlighted by the IUCN in its Red List literature. Simultaneously, the scope for ‘river ranching’ — the cultivation of the species in captivity and its release in the wild — needs to be explored seriously. Some dedicated scientists in Kerala are working to improve the weak captive-breeding record of the Denison barb, but a low female-to-male ratio complicates the situation. Any success in boosting captive stocks could theoretically relieve pressure on wild populations, although strong vigil would be necessary to prevent fraudulent certification. For now, there is a good case for prohibiting the export of specimens, dead or live. Meanwhile, the State government must take effective action to mitigate threats to the habitat posed by mining, hydroelectric projects, deforestation, and urban expansion. India has a rich trove of inland freshwater fish diversity. The vulnerability of this fish underscores the need to aggressively protect it under wildlife and biodiversity laws.
59) angible targets at school
Jandhyala B.G. Tilak
India’s relative position with respect to the Education Development Index remains poor. There is a lot to do in terms of improving schooling facilities.
According to the ‘EFA Global Monitoring Report 2010’ (UNESCO), India’s rank was 105 among 128 countries. And it continues to figure, along with a bunch of African and one or two Asian countries, such as Pakistan and Bangladesh, in the group of countries with a low educational development index (EDI). In 2001 also India ranked 105 among 127 countries. In 2007 India was behind not only countries such as Norway, Japan and Germany that figure at the top, but also several Latin American, African and Asian developing countries. These countries, which are economically poorer than India, include Zambia, Kenya, Ghana, Bhutan, Maldives and Cambodia. Only a score of countries such as Madagascar, Laos, Malawi, Burundi, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Niger are behind India.
All this would be quite puzzling to those who also read at the same time that there has been tremendous progress in India in recent years. That there are variations in the methodology adopted over the years by UNESCO, or that there are problems relating to data, or that there are certain inherent weaknesses in interpreting international rankings of this kind, do not, and should not, console serious policy-makers.
The enrolment ratio in primary education — both gross and net enrolment ratios — has improved over the years. The ‘adjusted’ net enrolment ratio in primary education is 94 per cent in 2007 (this includes children of the relevant age group enrolled in primary or secondary schools), according to the Global Monitoring Report. National data reports present a similar estimate. This figure is much higher than that in Sweden, Switzerland, and many countries that belong to the groups that have high and medium EDI figures. It represents substantial progress over the years.
But India’s performance with respect to all the other three components of EDI, namely, adult literacy, gender-specific EFA (Education for All) index, and “survival rate” to Grade V, is indeed appalling. The gender index is only 0.84 in India, compared to figures above 0.9 in all countries of high and medium EDI countries (except Zambia); only 66 per cent of adults in India are literate, compared to above 80 per cent in most countries that figure among the high and medium EDI groups.
Perhaps the most worrisome of all is the poor survival rate. Only 66 per cent of the children enrolled in Grade I survive to Grade V in India, that is, as much as 34 per cent of the children enrolled in Grade I drop out before reaching Grade V. In all probability they drop out without acquiring any level of progress with respect to the basic three R’s, contributing to the numbers of out-of-school children, to child labour and to the mass of the illiterate population. The survival rate is above 0.9 in most countries with medium and high EDI. A 90 to 95 per cent net enrolment ratio will have no meaning if there is also a 34 per cent dropout rate. Rapid progress in net enrolment ratio is possible, but a more important challenge is to ensure that the children enrolled in schools progress through the system to complete the given cycle of schooling and even beyond.
Earlier research has shown that children drop out of school for three kinds of reasons. The first reason given is that schools are not attractive. A second reason involves economic constraints (poverty, direct costs of schooling and child labour) that do not allow continuation in schools. Thirdly, there are reasons including the lack of a tradition of going to or continuing in schools.
Unattractive school facilities represent the most important reason that pushes children out of schools. Economic constraints also matter very much, though they matter more for enrolment of children in schools than for their continuation in schools. ‘Other’ reasons are not that important.
How attractive are the primary schools? According to the latest statistics available from the Flash Statistics and Analytical Reports on Elementary Education in India (District Information System for Education, published by the National University of Educational Planning and Administration in 2009-10), on an average there are only three classrooms per primary school in India, and there are only three teachers per school. About 14 per cent of the schools have a single classroom each, and single-teacher schools constitute a similar proportion. While the national norm is one teacher for every 40 students in primary schools, 30 per cent of the schools have a ratio above this norm. In some States like Bihar the ratio at the State level is 1:59, where there are 92 students on average per classroom. Only 85 per cent of the schools in the country have drinking water facilities; 37 per cent do not have toilets; only 44 per cent have separate toilet facilities for girls. Hardly one-fourth have electricity connection; only 5.7 per cent have a computer. Hardly half the schools have any medical facilities. About 32 per cent of the primary schools require major or minor repairs to buildings and so on. Many of these figures are national averages. The actual picture at disaggregated levels — regional and by social and economic groups of population — could be more disturbing.
The picture is indeed disturbing as much progress is claimed in the recent years. For example, after the launch in 2002 of the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) by the Government of India, which was preceded by investment in elementary education under the World Bank-funded project of the DPEP (District Primary Education Project) for about a decade, it is often reported that impressive progress has been made in elementary education in India. This progress is in terms of enrolments, buildings constructed, teachers appointed, amount of grant released/utilised, and so on. Where has all the progress gone?
It may not be altogether correct to state that SSA and other programmes of the Government of India have had no significant impact on the EDI of UNESCO and that they could not change India’s disgraceful relative rank position even by one point. But such a criticism may not look shallow either. Certainly there is a lot to do with respect to improvement of schooling facilities — both physical and human (teacher), and the overall functioning of the system — in order to improve the survival rate. This is necessary to build a strong and meaningful educational edifice in India.
Two statements will be relevant in this context. First, the survival rate of children to the final grade of primary education (sometimes beyond Grade 5) in most of the North American and Western European countries is 99 to 100 per cent; and in these countries the pupil-teacher ratio is below 20. In contrast, the pupil-teacher ratio in Sub-Saharan Africa is 44: it ranges between 24 in Botswana and 90 in the Central African Republic and survival rates hardly touch 70 per cent. Similarly, in India and Pakistan the pupil-teacher ratio is 40 and the survival rates are 67 and 72 per cent respectively. The implication should be clear: a pupil-teacher ratio of around 20 may be taken up as a desirable goal. We need good quality teachers in sufficient numbers. This is a basic prerequisite for quality primary education.
Secondly, when virtually every petroleum outlet in the country, including many in the remote rural areas, could be modernised to international standards, why cannot every primary school be made to match international standards? Operation Blackboard launched after 1986 might have provided basic minimum facilities in most schools, but it has not made schools sufficiently functional and attractive. We may need another such programme to equip schools with beyond the basic minimum level of facilities.
(Jandhyala B.G. Tilak is Professor at the National University of Educational Planning and Administration, New Delhi. e-mail: jtilak@nuepa.o
60) The euro’s darkest hour
Ian Traynor
EU leaders gather in Brussels amid rumours that struggling Greece will be bailed out.
European leaders gather in Brussels on Thursday for a summit devoted to economic policy amid growing speculation that they could come to Greece’s rescue in the first bailout by the eurozone of a single currency country.
The leaders appear determined not to let the Greek debt crisis and the risk to the European single currency hijack their musings on medium-term economic strategy, expected to dominate the agenda.
Athens and the eurozone enjoyed some respite from the pressure of the markets when the European Central Bank signalled that its head, Jean-Claude Trichet, had cut short a trip to Australia to rush back to Brussels for the summit.
That triggered speculation in the markets that the 16 eurozone countries may be preparing some form of bailout for Greece, which is teetering on the brink of national insolvency, beset by huge sovereign debt levels and a ballooning budget deficit. The euro recovered some of the ground it has lost recently as hedge funds and speculators have been betting against the single currency over fears of a debt crisis.
Signs of a rescue package came from Joaquin Almunia, the outgoing commissioner for monetary affairs, who told the European Parliament the summit should offer an aid package to Athens with strings attached. “I would like the leaders of Europe to say to the Greek authorities that in exchange for the efforts you are making, you are going to get support from us,” said Mr. Almunia. “We have got instruments to provide that in exchange for clear commitments that they will meet their responsibilities.”
Eurozone governments had agreed “in principle” to help Greece, a German government official told Reuters in Berlin.
By contrast, the European Central Bank and European Investment Bank ruled out involvement in a bailout.
And although recent days have seen the euro’s darkest hour in its 11-year life, officials in Brussels also played down talk of a rescue package.
“I don’t see any suggestion that anyone is coming with a bailout,” said a European commission official.
Across the institutions of the EU, from the central bank in Frankfurt to the commission to the European Council, the emphasis has been on waiting and seeing if the Greek government of George Papandreou can live up to its promises of savage spending cuts and structural reforms in order to dig its way out of the debt.
“There’s a significant risk the Greek crisis will hijack the summit,” said a diplomat. “People are getting worried about the spill-over effect in Spain and Portugal and about the social impact, of unrest on the streets.”
The meeting is an extraordinary summit convened by the EU’s new council President, Herman Van Rompuy, of Belgium, to canvass views from European government chiefs on medium-term policies aimed at shoring up the “European way of life” in an era of low growth.
Van Rompuy’s letter of invitation to the 27 government leaders makes no mention of Greece or the single currency and makes only minimal reference to the crisis. “The purpose of this meeting is primarily to discuss the direction of our economic policies for the years to come. This is even more important in the light of recent developments inside and outside the eurozone,” wrote Mr. Van Rompuy.
But Jose Manuel Barroso, President of the European commission, which was endorsed on Tuesday for a five-year term by the European Parliament, told MEPs in Strasbourg that as well as signalling to the markets that the single currency is safe it would be robustly defended if need be.
“Our common currency, the euro, will continue to constitute a major tool for our development and those who think it can be put in question must realise we will stick to our course,” he said.
“The European Union has the necessary framework to address any challenge.”
Short of an IMF-style bailout coupled with stringent lending terms, though, it is not entirely clear what the EU’s “necessary framework” amounts to since the eurozone is in terra incognita, never having had to come to the rescue of a single currency country at risk of default.
Analysts and economists warned of complacency and confusion, with the sharks in the markets smelling blood and upping their attacks on the euro.
“It’s a crisis that develops at the pace of the markets, not at the pace of official meetings. There is a risk of being behind the curve,” said Jean Pisani-Ferry, director of Bruegel, the Brussels economics think-tank. “Policymakers need to be clear about the endgame and make sure the markets grasp what is the endgame. If you get behind the curve, you lose credibility. To avoid this you have at some point to take the initiative and risks.”
A commission official said leaders would want to discuss the woes of the single currency, but only to a degree. “They won’t want to be having a fireside chat while the house is burning down. But they’ll be keen not to turn this into a summit on Greece, Spain, and Portugal. It’s not the main focus.”
— © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
61) Building schools to fight terrorism
Thomas L. Friedman
Attention needs to be paid to the education system in Yemen to prevent the country from becoming a breeding ground for the al-Qaeda.
I took part in a “qat chew” the other day at the home of a Yemeni official. Never done that before. Qat is the mildly hallucinogenic leaf drug that Yemeni men stuff in their cheek after work — and sometimes during. My hosts insisted that qat actually makes your senses sharper and that you could chew and chisel the top of a mosque minaret at the same time. I quit after 15 minutes, but the Yemeni officials, lawmakers and businessmen I was with chewed on for three hours — and they made a lot of sense along the way.
Most had been educated in America or had children studying there, and they were all bemoaning how the decline of the Yemeni education system, the proliferation of exclusively religious schools here and the falloff in scholarships for Yemeni children to study in America were producing a very different Yemeni generation than their own.
So here is my new rule of thumb: For every Predator missile the U.S. fires at an al-Qaeda target here, it should help Yemen build 50 new modern schools that teach science and math and critical thinking — for boys and girls.
If we stick to something close to that ratio of targeted killings to targeted kindergartens, we have a chance to prevent Yemen from becoming an al-Qaeda breeding ground. Because right now there are some 300,000 college-educated Yemenis out of work — partly because of poor training and partly because there are no jobs — 15,000 schoolchildren not attending any classes, 65 per cent of teachers with only high school degrees and thousands of children learning little more than religious doctrines.
And no wonder. Beginning in the 1970s, the trend in Yemen, Morocco, Egypt and the Persian Gulf “was to Islamicise education as a way to fight the left and pro-communists — with the blessing of the U.S.”, explained Lahcen Haddad, a professor at the University of Rabat in Morocco and an expert on governance with Management Systems International, a U.S. development contractor.
Then, in 1979, after the Saudi Arabian ruling family was shaken by an attack in Mecca from its own Wahabi fundamentalists, the Saudi Arabian regime, to fend off the anger of its Wahabis, “gave them free rein to Islamicise education and social life in Saudi Arabia and neighbouring states.”
“Missions — cultural and religious, semi-official and private — roamed Islamic countries to spread the word,” said Mr. Haddad. “Cheap books followed, and students were brought to Saudi to learn from Wahabi preachers and teachers in the different religious universities that mushroomed in the eighties.”
Small, economically deprived Yemen was an easy target. Uncritically accepting of the “truths” of Wahabism became the core curriculum in many Yemeni schools, Mr. Haddad added, and “it destroyed the opportunity to build the basic skills necessary to train the right labour force — skills like problem-solving, communication, critical thinking, debate, organisation and teamwork.”
America’s last great ideological foe, Soviet Marxism, produced its share of violent radicals, but it also produced Andrei Sakharov and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn — because it believed in science, physics, math and the classics of literature. Islamism is not producing any Sakharovs.
May Yamani, the author and daughter of the former Saudi Arabian Oil Minister, Ahmad Zaki Yamani, minced no words, writing in The Beirut Daily Star: “Saudi Arabia exported both its Wahabism and al-Qaeda to Yemen by funding thousands of madrassas, where fanaticism is taught.”
Ahmed Sofan, a Yemeni parliamentarian, told me that back in the 1970s if you visited a village in his rural constituency, most of the women would be unveiled and working alongside the men. No more, he said, “because we now have this Wahabi sense of religious conservatism where women are supposed to be inside and be veiled.”
Added Abdul Karim al-Iryani, a former Prime Minister: Growing up, “we studied Darwinism in my high school without challenge”. Not anymore. “The East Asian miracle,” he added, “wasn’t possible without women. In the Arab world, if half our society is excluded, how will we ever catch up with those new tigers?”
The Yemeni journalist Mohammed al-Qadhi reported in The National newspaper that there may be 10,000 religious-based schools educating Yemeni youth today. He quoted a top Yemeni education official as saying, “We are now obliging these schools to teach moderation to protect our students against extremism.”
In other words, we are now fighting for the West Asia of the 2020s and 2030s. Huge chunks of this generation are lost. When I went to seen Yemen’s President Ali Abdullah Saleh at his Sana’a palace, he was in a reflective mood: “I would wish that this arms race could end and instead we could have a race for development.”
It is the only way, Yemen will have a future. So, yes, fire those Predators where we must, but help build schools and fund scholarships to America wherever we can.
— © 2010 The New York Times News Service
62) World first personal carbon credit earns $17
Suzanne Goldenberg
Solar panels costing $58,000 bring a couple modest return as home-owners look to DIY system of emissions trading.
As investments go, it does not look like a money-spinner. Invest $58,000 to line the roof of your suburban home with solar panels, and pick up $17.20 in exchange for the reduction in your household carbon emissions. But the Pennsylvania couple who have earned the world’s first carbon credit for reducing personal emissions think it has been worth it.
Randy and Tami Wilson, of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, earned the single credit through a transaction brokered by the My Emissions Exchange website. It aims to certify emissions reductions by home owners or tenants and then sell those credits to companies looking to up their green quotient.
The website’s existence suggests that while Congress may have given up on creating a national scheme for trading carbon emissions, there are ordinary Americans willing to play the voluntary market. The company says it has signed up 1,800 households since going into business last autumn.
A company in Middlefield, Ohio, Molten Metal Equipment, bought the Wilsons’ carbon credit, representing a tonne of carbon dioxide, for $21.50. The website earned $4.30 in commission, and the Wilsons took home $17.20.
But this modest cash reward was not the only reason for the Wilsons’s solar conversion. Outraged by a threatened 30 per cent price hike by their local electricity provider, they hired a contractor to install 36 solar panels on their roof.
“When my husband and I heard six or eight months ago from PPL Electric Utilities that our energy costs were going up 30 to 40 per cent, we said to ourselves, what can we do?” said Tami Wilson.
In addition to the solar panels, the Wilsons also switched to energy-savings light bulbs, replaced their windows, and made a habit of turning off computers, DVDs and other appliances not in use. They adopted a “hybrid” system for doing laundry, putting wet clothes in a dryer for 10 minutes before hanging them on a line. They got rid of their son’s heated waterbed.
The couple told reporters they were counting on federal and state tax credits to recoup $36,000 of their investment, but it will still take six years to get back the rest of their investment through energy savings and the sale of carbon credits. At that point, though, the solar panels will be turning a profit. “Then we basically have no electric [bill] for life,” Ms. Wilson said.
Prospective domestic carbon traders begin by handing over a year’s worth of electricity and heating bills. American households — with the stereotypical television in every teenagers’ bedroom — are notorious energy hogs. The average family produces about 30 tonnes of carbon dioxide a year.
If the family then goes on to reduce emissions, the website will calculate how much carbon they have saved. The savings then translate into credits for every tonne of carbon avoided. The company certifies the credits, and then arranges the sale. The company says customers gain twice, in carbon credits and in lower electricity bills — although it will obviously take time before major investments, like the Wilsons’ solar panels, pay for themselves.
But it says even replacing a few old light bulbs with compact fluorescent bulbs or putting in a programmable thermostat would be enough for most homes to offset about a tonne of carbon a year — or about $17.20 after commission.
— © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
63) Palestinians must test Netanyahu’s peace claims
Jonathan Freedland
Allies of the Israeli Prime Minister insist that he is ready to talk peace. If his bluff is called, he will be forced to do just that.
Tired of the jokes about his wife, perhaps, Northern Ireland’s First Minister Peter Robinson last week cracked a gag of his own. Marking an end to more than 100 hours of talks, he said that the province would be lobbying for the inclusion of negotiating as an Olympic sport in time for the London games of 2012 — and that Northern Ireland would win the gold medal.
Not so fast. There could be stiff competition, at least in the endurance event. One hundred hours might seem like a marathon to Mr. Robinson, as must the long Good Friday process that preceded it. But for Palestinians and Israelis, that is little more than a warm-up. They have been involved in peace talks, one way or the other, since the Oslo accords of 1993. And while the people of Northern Ireland have a prize to show for all that effort — namely, peace — the negotiators of West Asia are still, 17 years on, empty-handed. If Mr. Robinson and Martin McGuinness have earned their gold, the Israelis and Palestinians surely deserve a medal for fruitless stamina.
And now they are poised to submit themselves to another round, with February 20 pencilled in the diary. This time, just as beach volleyball made its debut at the Atlanta Olympics, the organisers are introducing a new format. The two sides will not sit across a table, but rather in two separate rooms. The referee — the role taken by that hero of Good Friday 1998, the former U.S. Senator and now West Asia envoy, George Mitchell — will shuttle between the two. If the Israelis say “no”, Mr. Mitchell will knock on the Palestinian door and say that they said “maybe”. If the Palestinians say that the Israelis can go to hell, the perennially patient Mr. Mitchell will relay the message as: “They’ve asked for more detail.” Think of a couple who refuse to speak to each other, communicating instead through their children. “Tell her, I need to use the car tonight.” You might call it infantile. In international diplomacy, they call it proximity talks.
After 17 years of disappointment, it makes sense to approach this latest effort with our expectations somewhere below the sub-basement. It is not certain the talks will begin at all: Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is currently consulting Arab and other foreign leaders on whether he should drop his insistence that there should be no talks until Israel agrees to freeze all settlement-building in the occupied West Bank. The message he is getting is that he should accept Israel’s partial and temporary moratorium on building, and talk.
At the heart of Mr. Abbas’s dilemma is a judgment on his Israeli counterpart. Is Binyamin Netanyahu serious about peace, or is he doing the bare minimum to keep Washington off his back? One nugget of conventional wisdom holds that while the Palestinians want a deal but not negotiations, the Israelis want negotiations but not a deal. In this view, Mr. Netanyahu is happy to go through the motions of talks — so that he can boast to world opinion that he is doing the right thing — just so long as he does not have to do anything difficult. That way he can preserve his rightwing coalition, which would surely unravel at the first whiff of compromise. Others say that Bibi is sincere, even impatient for an agreement. Which view is right? Even those who work for the Israeli Prime Minister are not sure. One official tells me he does not yet know if his boss is Yitzhak Shamir — the former Likud Prime Minister and human roadblock who made a career out of saying no — or Ariel Sharon, the Likud leader who eventually seemed determined to resolve the conflict until he was fatefully struck down by a stroke.
In the Shamir column stands Mr. Netanyahu’s entire past record as a hawk who has repeatedly opposed peace efforts. His rhetoric does not suggest he has undergone the profound, internal shift that seemed to have moved Mr. Sharon or, more visibly, Bibi’s immediate predecessor, Ehud Olmert. Indeed, at the recent Herzliya security conference, Mr. Netanyahu pointedly contrasted himself with Mr. Sharon, who had used that same forum to announce his Gaza withdrawal plan, pledging his loyalty instead to “the land of our forefathers”. The message seemed clear: Mr. Sharon gave up land, I will keep hold of it.
Sure, he has agreed a freeze on some construction, but there are plenty of holes in that ice: East Jerusalem is not included, nor are non-residential buildings, nor is construction already under way. And even this limited “moratorium” expires in September, with Bibi giving no hint that it will be extended. Meanwhile, at his side remains a Foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, who not only continues to make thuggish threats to Israel’s neighbours but recently declared that “if a Palestinian state is established, there will be no Israel”. None of this will encourage the Palestinians that, when they sit down for talks, in the room next door will be a man ready to make peace.
And yet, just on Tuesday Mr. Netanyahu said at a lunch for European ambassadors, “Test me.” I am told the Americans have been saying the same thing to Mr. Abbas and his team: you’ll be surprised how far Bibi is prepared to go.
This “Sharon” view of Mr. Netanyahu notes his belated endorsement of the two-state solution. Belated, yes; begrudging, most certainly; but it still came at a political cost, antagonising his rightwing base. They make similar noises about the settlement moratorium: for all its limitations, Hillary Clinton was right to say that it was “unprecedented”. No Israeli leader had done anything like it before. For those who doubt its reality, talk to the Palestinian construction workers who, in a bitter paradox, are angry that they can no longer get work building homes for Jewish settlers. As for that Herzliya speech, other observers spotted that when Bibi listed those places that constituted Israel’s true “heritage”, he named none in occupied territory.
But surely the fact that late last year Israel announced further building in East Jerusalem undermines any claim that Mr. Netanyahu is serious about peace? Not so, say his defenders. It merely showed that Bibi is now drawing a distinction between those lands he intends to keep and those he is ready to give up, an implicit end to the dream of Greater Israel, in which Israel would keep the lot.
The Prime Minister’s allies say that in person he is a different man from the brash, wheeler-dealer of his first, 1990s term. They describe a thoughtful person, always reading, determined to do more than merely keep “the seat warm”. They say he now wants to do what eluded his predecessors and come to an agreement.
It all sounds wonderful. The trouble is, as even his advocates confess, there is only the slimmest evidence for it: lots of warm words, very few concrete deeds. Which leaves the Palestinians with a choice. They can heed Mr. Mitchell when he says “Trust me” — and turn up at the proximity talks, waiting to hear what Bibi comes up with. Or, better, they can take Mr. Netanyahu at his word when he says “Test me” — and do more than wait. They should devise a strategy that will push the Israeli Prime Minister, forcing him to make good on all the talk. It will mean taking him by surprise with a move that requires a serious response. But do it: call his bluff.
One Palestinian insider says they are about to enter “a grey zone”, full of uncertainty. But the alternative is no talks at all. And, even after 17 years of frustration, that would be a disaster.
— © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
64) Uzbek filmmaker convicted of slander
An Uzbek film director was convicted of slander on Wednesday for making a documentary on wedding rituals in the authoritarian ex-Soviet state, but released on amnesty, the artist and her lawyer said.
Umida Akhmedova said the court in the Uzbek capital, Tashkent, found her guilty of slander and “offense through mass media”.
Ms. Akhmedova’s film, The Burden of Virginity, describes hardships young women face in the mostly Muslim nation during and after the traditional nuptial ceremonies, including the public demonstration of a bloodstained bedsheet after the first night. The film has never been shown in Uzbekistan, but is available online.
Ms. Akhmedova’s public trial used a conclusion of government-appointed experts that found her film “offensive for the Uzbek nation” and a media campaign that lambasted her films and photographs. Ms. Akhmedova also said the experts negatively evaluated her photo album on the life of rural Uzbeks, concluding the pictures prompt foreigners to think that Uzbekistan “lives in the Middle Ages.”
Her lawyer, Sergei Mayorov, said the court “completely ignored” his arguments and evidence proving Ms. Akhmedova’s innocence. He said the judge could have sentenced the director to three years in jail, but instead used an amnesty to release her.
— AP
65) A sound decision
In placing a moratorium on the release of Bt brinjal till independent scientific studies establish its safety, the Union Environment Ministry has quite rightly addressed both scientific concerns and public opinion. After the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee cleared Bt brinjal in October 2009, the country witnessed widespread protests, some of them by activists who were irrationally opposed to the very concept of Bt or genetic modification. The fears and apprehensions among certain sections, however, gathered greater force in the absence of clear consensus among the scientific community in favour of allowing the genetically modified vegetable to be introduced. In the end, the moratorium was the right way out of a situation that had as much to do with politics as with science. As Union Minister of State for Environment Jairam Ramesh put it, there was no overriding urgency or food security argument to warrant pushing through Bt brinjal in the face of public opposition. With questions raised about the testing procedures, and attention drawn to the lack of long-term toxicity tests and the absence of data from sources independent of the marketing company, there was much to lose and little to gain from forcing Bt brinjal on Indian consumers. Also, opposition from 10 State governments, including those of the major brinjal-producing States, curtailed the options before the Environment Ministry.
However, the moratorium should be used, not to slow down research on Bt products, which hold long-term cost and supply benefits, but to put in place a system of credible and transparent testing that will win public confidence. Setting up of an independent biotechnology regulatory authority could be one of the first steps. In the case of Bt cotton, the benefits to farmers are proven with reduced input costs and higher yields. True, when it comes to food, the concerns are of an altogether different magnitude. Brinjal is a widely used vegetable that is consumed directly and not in a processed form. The problem is rendered more acute because the practical and cost-related difficulties in labelling GM foods take choice out of the hands of the consumers. But while the government will have to reassure the people and address concerns over the long-term effects on health and the impact on environment of Bt brinjal, there is no place for an absolutist stand against GM foods. To advocate a blanket ban on genetic modification is anti-science and is fraught with grave dangers. More science and better science is the answer to the questions raised by genetic modification, and not unreasoning anti-change activism based on irrational fears.
66) Moving towards normal growth
In its advance estimate of economic growth for the current year (2009-10), the Central Statistical Organisation has projected a rate of 7.2 per cent. Though lower than the 7.5 per cent forecast by the Reserve Bank of India recently and the 7.75 per cent by the mid-year economic survey, the CSO’s projection gives room for optimism. If it materialises, India might well be seen creeping back towards the high growth trajectory, from which it slipped in 2008-09. After recording an average growth of well above 9 per cent for three years between 2005 and 2008, the GDP rose by 6.7 per cent last year — a commendable performance, given the difficult situation caused by the global financial crisis and the ensuing recession. A rate of above 7 per cent will be further proof of the Indian economy’s resilience. Besides, the economy has, by and large, weathered the consequences of a poor south-west monsoon during 2009. The agricultural sector has been particularly hit by severe droughts and floods in several parts of the country. Under the circumstances, a projected growth rate of minus-0.2 per cent for agriculture, though below last year’s 1.6 per cent, is better than expected and is unlikely to drag down the overall growth substantially as feared earlier. The contraction is partly attributed to a sharp drop in the production of food grains and oil seeds. Inadequate supply of food articles is the principal factor behind the raging food inflation.
Economic growth during the first half of 2009-10 has averaged 7 per cent, thanks largely to an extraordinary 7.9 per cent growth in the second quarter. While the government expects agriculture to recover sharply during the fourth quarter on top of a bumper winter crop, it is clear that it is the stellar performance of industry that will lift the GDP growth rate above 7 per cent. Manufacturing is expected to grow at 8.9 per cent. The mining and quarrying sector and the electricity, gas and water supply segment are predicted to post a growth rate of well over 8 per cent. The growth momentum is broad-based, with most of the sub-segments in industry and services performing above their long-term trends. The services sector, which is the traditional growth driver, is forecast to grow at around 8.3 per cent, less than last year. Construction as well as the segment comprising trade, hotels, transport, and communications will grow faster than last year. However, community, social and personal services may not do so well. With the spectre of high inflation looming large, the relatively strong growth might well induce the authorities to opt for a calibrated withdrawal of the stimulus packages.
67)
The mind in modern medicine
Ennapadam S. Krishnamoorthy
The view that it is not enough to heal the body of the affected person, that we must also heal the mind, is gaining credence.
It is curious that the mind, so important at the turn of the 20th century, is experiencing today a reawakening in scientific and societal consciousness. The founders of modern medical science in the 18th and 19th centuries had clearly conceived the mind to be a representation of the brain; people like Alois Alzheimer demonstrated pathological abnormalities in the brain of people affected with dementia. Indeed, centuries earlier, the father of modern medicine, Hippocrates, had firmly placed “our joys, sorrows, desires and feelings” in the brain.
Sigmund Freud, who started his career as a neurologist, developed an interest in the mind while a student of the legendary neurologist Charcot in Paris. Charcot was deeply interested in hysteria, that condition where physical symptoms like fainting, seizures and paralysis are expressed due to an abnormal emotional state, rather than an abnormal physical state. Many aspiring neurologists of the time including Freud were attracted to Paris by Charcot’s knowledge and erudition.
Sigmund Freud, however, branched off from Charcot to develop his own hypothesis of the human mind, in what famously became the school of psychoanalysis. Freud took the exploration of the mind in hysterical states deeper, into areas that few physicians before him had dared to tread. His theory of “consciousness” attempted to explain the role of deep-rooted emotional conflicts originating in early life, in developing symptoms of the mind later on. Freudian thought is complex, requiring many hours of concerted study. In a nutshell, Freud proposed that the human tendency was to repress anxiety provoking emotional conflicts that the conscious mind could not possibly contemplate. While these thoughts were confined to the unconscious mind, there were, inevitably, times when they emerged into the conscious, and given their unacceptable nature manifested (were converted into) a physical symptom, instead. Freudian thought spawned a school of psychoanalysis which dominated the practice of “psychological medicine” for over a century. However, his all-pervasive view of sexual underpinnings for all manner of emotional conflict, for example the Oedipus complex where the mother is the inappropriate object of sexual attention of the male child, was not accepted in its totality by his contemporaries.
Two milestones in the latter half of the twentieth century brought the mind firmly back into the realm of brain science. The first, the discovery of the neuroleptic drug chlorpromazine that could control effectively the symptoms of serious mental illness like schizophrenia, followed on by a range of psychotropic drugs with potential to address a range of other emotional symptoms, provided indirect evidence that the brain had a role in the development and manifestation of human emotions. The second, the development of several dynamic brain-imaging tools in the last two decades of the twentieth century and the first decade of the twenty-first, has transformed our understanding of the human brain and mind, permitting us to visualise live, brain activity during a psychological task.
Crossroads
The brain and mind interface is therefore at an interesting crossroads in modern medicine. There is a growing understanding in medical science of the role our brains play in determining what are predominantly emotional symptoms. Research, for example, has shown that people with psychopathic personalities, hitherto considered to suffer from a disorder of the mind, have a poor perception of others’ facial emotions, and experience difficulties in affect recognition (that is, gauging the other person’s mood). These abnormalities in perception have been linked to abnormalities in brain function, the amygdala, part of the emotional brain, being implicated in many instances. Clearly, as our ability to image the mind expands, so will our understanding of brain-mind relationships and knowledge of “how the mind works!”
From a social and health policy perspective, the mind has assumed considerable importance. In a seminal paper, “The Mental Wealth of Nations,” published in Nature (Volume 455; October 23, 2008), Beddington and colleagues emphasise that countries must learn to capitalise on their citizens’ cognitive resources if they are to prosper, both economically and socially, and that early interventions for emotional health and cognition will be the key to prosperity. Reporting the Foresight Project on Mental Capital and Wellbeing commissioned by the U.K. Government Office for Science, they introduce two important concepts. Mental capital encompasses both cognitive and emotional resources. It includes people’s cognitive ability; their flexibility and efficiency at learning; and their emotional intelligence, or social skills and resilience in the face of stress. Mental well-being, on the other hand, refers to individuals’ ability to develop their potential, work productively and creatively, build strong and positive relationships with others and contribute to their community. The importance of detecting mental disorders early, the role of science, for example neural markers for childhood learning disability; the development of early interventions that enhance mental capital and mental well-being, boosting brain power through the lifespan; and encouragement for processes that will help people adapt well to the changing needs of the workplace, as also engage in life-long learning, are highlighted here.
From a clinical practice perspective, the importance of mental health, wellness and health-related quality of life as outcome indicators of both physical and mental disorders is becoming widely accepted. The view is that it is not enough to heal the body of a person affected with physical disease; it is also crucial that we heal the mind, enhancing wellness, is gaining credence in modern medicine, quality of life having become established as the best outcome of treatment. Indeed, the reintegration of people into society as they recover from illness requires as an imperative the restoration of both their mental capital and mental well-being.
Pray, what is the status of hysteria, that original symptom of the mind, in this era of modern medicine, you may well ask. It is noteworthy that a whole range of bodily symptoms that have no physical basis — tension headache and chronic fatigue, atypical facial pain, atypical chest pain, irritable bowels and bladder, fibromyalgia, burning in the private parts, to name just a few — all have their putative origins in the theory of hysterical conversion. It is estimated that between 20 per cent and 35 per cent of all primary care consultations and about a fifth of all emergency room visits are for physical symptoms such as these, that do not have a physical basis. They are also responsible for the loss of many patient and caregiver workdays; untold suffering and burdensome expense, both personal and social; and unnecessary investigations in pursuit of that elusive diagnosis.
Physicians who frequently encounter these symptoms have learnt to spot the telltale signs that are their forerunner: multiple consultations (doctor shopping); the large bag filled with a variety of investigation reports that have mysteriously failed to identify “anything wrong”; the constant need for reassurance, combined curiously with disbelief in the doctor’s opinion, notwithstanding his erudition; the development of new symptoms, without any apparent physical basis, soon after old ones disappear; disenchantment with the medical profession for failing to diagnose, sometimes even subtle pride in being “such a difficult diagnostic dilemma”; as indeed the failure of any serious setback to manifest itself despite months, sometimes years, of ongoing symptoms… the list of diagnostic clues is endless.
The French physician Briquet described this syndrome which for many years carried his name. In modern medicine this ailment goes by the name “Somatisation Disorder.” And in the clinic setting, in an era of advancing diagnostic technology, it has become the most common manifestation of hysteria. Indeed, somatisation, thought to be more common in non-western cultures with traditionally limited verbal expression of emotions, is almost becoming fashionable, akin to “swooning” (another hysterical symptom) in the Victorian era.
Hysteria does therefore exemplify the importance of the mind in modern medicine. It may well have origins in the brain, which future research may reveal: it clearly is a significant public health problem that does affect mental capital and well-being; it does pose a tremendous drain on the public exchequer and private resources; it has potential for cure through early diagnosis and intervention; and interestingly, may well be the last frontier to traverse at the interface between the brain and mind.
(Dr. Ennapadam S. Krishnamoorthy is Honorary Secretary & T.S. Srinivasan Chair in Clinical Neurosciences and Health Policy, Voluntary Health Services. E-mail: esk@nsig.org)
68) K.N. Raj: He stimulated discussion in India on regional and inter-State disparities in economic growth.
In 1960, when I was enrolled for my MA at the Delhi School of Economics, the shining star at the School was certainly K.N. Raj. The founder of the School, V.K.R.V. Rao, had left the institution, but came back every Founders’ Day to remind us of its glorious past and of the enduring values it embodied. Raj’s style was much lower key, but it soon became clear that his dedication to the School was not less than that of Rao.
Raj taught the MA first year paper in Monetary Economics (as it was then called). He was highly organised. Unlike many other teachers, he revised and retyped his lectures every year to take account of new material. I have no doubt that he was the best teacher I have had. He would begin his exposition at a relatively low level to take account of the heterogeneity of the class and then over the year imperceptibly raise the level of treatment of the subject. Yet, he never gave the impression of unduly oversimplifying the subject or of avoiding difficult issues. He was very patient with students and would give them time during and after the class to explain again any point they did not understand. In later years he gave up this course and instead lectured mainly on Indian economics. He gave this subject stronger analytical content and strengthened interest in applied economics among his students, many of whom went on to make major contributions in this field.
Demanding research supervisor
I was inspired by Raj to do research at the School rather than take the default option of competing for the administrative services. I found out soon enough that as a PhD supervisor or “guide”, Raj was a hard taskmaster. He did not believe in rewriting his students’ work and he did not want his students to write joint papers with him. He expected each chapter to be typed and finalised before it was submitted to him. He would then read it and indicate by underlining or markings on the side whatever he felt needed attention. What was exasperating was that he would not indicate what precisely was needed; I had to work it out and make the required changes. When I complained that one of my chapters had already gone through six revisions, he smiled and told me that the PhD degree was only a trade union card. However, before I was admitted to the trade union I would have to prove that I could think logically and write clearly and well.
Great economist
Raj’s contributions as a professional economist were many; rather than attempting to cover them all, I will highlight just a few taken from areas of shared interest. I think his finest work was the lectures he delivered at the National Bank of Egypt in the early 1950s on the employment aspects of planning. These were published by the bank but, unfortunately, the book soon became almost impossible to find. The lectures reveal a remarkable understanding of the social fabric of rural India. In his view, the supply of labour was made up of two parts: the more or less purely agricultural labour households seeking wage employment and farming families in which members worked on the family farm and occasionally took up outside employment. The western concept of a labour market was directly applicable to the former, but not fully to the latter. He attacked Arthur Lewis’s concept of unlimited supply of labour at the existing wage available to the modern sector, arguing that this was not valid for the self-employed and unpaid family workers within cultivating households, as their decision to work outside the household depended upon such factors as the decision of the household (or its head) and the relation between the average household income and the wage offered in the modern sector.
This view of the complexity of labour supply in the Indian rural economy was carried forward by him in his contributions to the work of the ILO Committee of Experts on Employment Objectives of Economic Development in 1961 and in his work on the Planning Commission’s Committee of Experts on Unemployment Estimates in 1969 and 1970, where I had the privilege of being his associate.
Another important contribution of Raj lay in stimulating discussion in India on regional and inter-State disparities in economic growth. His paper in the Economic Weekly in the early 1960s led to a whole field of study and considerable improvements in the measurement and comparison of State domestic products. He was later to pioneer comparisons between the growth records of India, Pakistan and China.
Master builder
As rebuilder of the Department of Economics of the Delhi School of Economics, his finest qualities emerged. He searched worldwide to recruit the best economists that were available and worked tirelessly to ensure that they were given the terms and conditions they deserved. Unlike many other academic leaders, he did not worry about being overshadowed by the people he recruited. Excellence at the School was all that mattered to him and he achieved this in abundant measure. Those of us who were at the School in the 1960s were struck not only by the brilliance and fame of many of the new appointees but also the wide range of their specialities. Many were probably much better equipped in terms of modern mathematical economics and econometrics than he was and were often much better known in international circles. But this did not deter him and this, I believe, is the hallmark of his greatness.
While he used his power as the head of the department to achieve what he felt the department needed, he simultaneously promoted internal democracy, decentralisation and sharing of responsibilities. Staff meetings were marked by the free expression of diverging views and young staff members like me were struck by the brilliance of the arguments and counter-arguments of our seniors and by the way in which Raj resolved these differences. To the consternation of many other heads of departments, he introduced the rule of rotation of the post of head of the department. This practice has since become the norm in Delhi University.
Not many people today know that he was an accomplished actor and directed for some years the annual School play. When pointing out how we could improve our performance he was always soft-spoken but firm. I vividly remember him sitting in the back row of Swami Vivekananda Hall in 1960 or 1961 calculating the income of Indian States, pausing from time to time to encourage us and to provide constructive suggestions.
Humane economist
I remember Raj not just as an inspiring teacher, demanding supervisor, great Indian economist and master builder of institutions, but also as a humane person for whom every student or colleague was special. His intolerance of inequity and social injustice was deep and infectious; and his life-long concern for the highest levels in academic excellence and integrity continue to set a standard we can only try to reach.
(J. Krishnamurty was a Professor at the Delhi School of Economics, retired as Senior Economist, ILO and is currently Visiting Professor at the Institute for Human Development, New Delhi.)
69) Has Mandela’s long walk led nowhere?
David Smith
Even as crowds in Cape Town mark the 20th anniversary of Mandela’s release, many say little progress has been made towards a fairer society.
Thousands of people are expected to gather near Cape Town in South Africa on Thursday to celebrate the 20th anniversary of Nelson Mandela’s release.
It will be the centrepiece of commemorations to mark the moment that Mr. Mandela emerged after 27 years behind bars, ushering in a transition from apartheid to multi-racial democracy and his rise to become the country’s first President of African origin.
This morning Winnie Madikizela-Mandela, who held Mr. Mandela’s hand and punched the air in triumph on that day, will lead a 500-metre march from the former Victor Verster prison in Paarl, Western Cape, to symbolise the walk that was seen by a TV audience of millions.
Mr. Mandela’s former wife is also expected to address a rally attended by African National Congress veterans including Ahmed Kathrada and Denis Goldberg.
Mr. Mandela himself will not be present, but will make a rare public appearance in Parliament to hear the fourth post-apartheid President, Jacob Zuma, deliver a state of the nation address.
The prison where Mr. Mandela spent his last months in captivity was on Wednesday named a memorial site by South Africa’s National Heritage Council.
Mr. Mandela’s release followed years of political pressure against apartheid. President F.W. de Klerk signalled it was imminent in a dramatic address to Parliament on February 2, 1990. Nine days later, Mr. Mandela walked through the prison gates holding Winnie’s hand with his right fist raised. A huge crowd awaited him. “I was astounded and a little bit alarmed,” he recalled later. “I truly had not expected such a scene. At most, I had imagined there would be several dozen people, mainly the warders and their families. But this proved to be only the beginning.” The Mandelas climbed into a silver Toyota Cressida and were driven to the centre of Cape Town to address a huge crowd. Mr. Mandela pulled out his speech and realised he had forgotten his glasses, but Winnie gave him hers.
The 20th anniversary of South Africa’s equivalent of the fall of the Berlin Wall has focused a debate on whether the promise of that day has been fulfilled.
Andrew Feinstein, a former African National Congress MP who resigned in protest over alleged government corruption, said: “My overwhelming sense when I look at South Africa today is just how far we as the ANC and South Africa have fallen from the heady days of Mandela’s years in office. It was an inspiring example of occupying the moral high ground. That’s now gone and I suppose I look at it with a sense of sadness.
“This anniversary is bittersweet. When one looks at the personal morality of the current leadership, the level of corruption, the delays in meaningful delivery of basic services, you feel the euphoria of the triumph over apartheid does feel tarnished.”
Optimists say South Africa is a stable democracy with a strong liberal Constitution, has the continent’s biggest economy, is about to become the first African nation to host the World Cup, and has witnessed a healing of race relations unthinkable in the 1980s.
Pessimists argue it is the most unequal society in the world, with about one in four people unemployed, violent crime and political corruption rife, and the majority of people of African origin living in squalid townships or settlements little different from two decades ago.
Professor Jonathan Jansen, the first rector of African origin of the historically white Free State university, said: “It’s going to take a Mandela II if we’re going to claw our way out of this moral crisis. Race relations are on knife edge. The modern state is founded on a spirit of reconciliation, but the longer the inequalities exist, the more desperate people become and the greater the risk of a crack in race relations.”
Some veterans of the struggle have a profound sense of disappointment. Professor Willie Esterhuyse, an Afrikaner academic who liaised between Mr. de Klerk’s government and the ANC in the run-up to the end of apartheid, said: “Mandela captured the hopes of whites and blacks. But that hope did not really materialise because the problems were too big. The socioeconomic issues were just ghastly to deal with in a 10 or 20-year time span. When the management of these problems didn’t make the grade, they worsened.”
Whereas Mr. Mandela remains a quasi-saint to most South Africans, Mr. Zuma is facing the biggest crisis of his presidency after being forced to apologise for an adulterous relationship in which he fathered his 20th child.
But the fact that sex scandals dominate the headlines could suggest that the country bears an increasing resemblance to its western counterparts.
Frans Cronje, deputy director of the South African Institute of Race Relations, said: “We’ve all realised to a lesser or greater extent that South Africa is in fact just another normal society. Its problems are increasingly mundane. International attention has gone to other issues: the Middle East [West Asia] and, from time to time, other crises like Haiti. South Africans have been left to get on with it.”
— © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
70) Climate fight is heating up in deep freeze
John M. Broder
As millions of people along the U.S. East Coast hole up in their snowbound homes, the two sides in the climate-change debate are seizing on the mounting drifts to bolster their arguments. Skeptics of global warming are using the record-setting snows to mock those who warn of dangerous human-driven climate change — this looks more like global cooling, they taunt.
Most climate scientists respond that the ferocious storms are consistent with forecasts that a heating planet will produce more frequent and more intense weather events. But some independent climate experts say the blizzards in the Northeast no more prove that the planet is cooling than the lack of snow in Vancouver or the downpours in Southern California prove that it is warming. Climate scientists say that no single episode of severe weather can be blamed for global climate trends while noting evidence that such events will probably become more frequent as global temperatures rise.
A federal report issued last year, intended to be the authoritative statement of known climate trends in the United States, pointed to the likelihood of more frequent snowstorms in the Northeast and less frequent snow in the South and Southeast as a result of long-term temperature and precipitation patterns.
In other words, if the government scientists are correct, look for more snow.
— © 2010 The New York Times News Service
71) Fear is the key
Meena Menon
The Shiv Sena’s diatribe against Shahrukh Khan is meant to intimidate, instil fear, and show once again that it is a force to reckon with.
The Shiv Sena, still smarting under Rahul Gandhi’s whiplash suburban train ride, has shown that it cannot be so easily written off. The Shahrukh Khan starrer My Name is Khan is not going to be released on Friday as slated. The Sena’s timeworn terror tactics have worked once again to create an atmosphere of uncertainty in Mumbai and many parts of Maharashtra, forcing theatre owners to delay the launch of the film. Mr. Khan’s crime is that he favoured the inclusion of Pakistani players in the IPL. Are you with the Sena or with Shahrukh, is the question doing the rounds in Mumbai.
Theatres are shaky about screening the film, despite the promise of tight security from the police. Sainiks have been hyperactive, stretching the city police’s imagination to think of novel ways of preventing trouble. The Sena’s ally, the Bharatiya Janata Party(BJP), is not in the fray — it is dealing with real issues. “So many of our people were lathicharged at an anti-price rise rally in the city recently but not a single channel showed it,” remarked a BJP leader.
Price rise is far from the minds of the average Shiv Sainik. Sena leaders are busy deciding to return their security, they have little time to spare for mundane issues. They are busy issuing threats to Australian cricketers and to Mr. Khan. Even Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) president Sharad Pawar’s visit to meet Mr. Bal Thackeray on Sunday could not buoy the Sena’s spirits. Though Mr. Pawar went ostensibly to request Mr. Bal Thackeray to call off his threat to Australian players, it sent confusing signals. The Congress and its ally are not very far from the right wing. They like to keep in touch and show deference once in a while.
The Sena is more than worried. In the past, film distributors fell at Mr. Bal Thackeray’s feet. This time that has not happened yet. My Name is Khan’s director Karan Johar took the lawful path by meeting the city police Commissioner on Tuesday and not Mr. Thackeray. Last year Mr. Johar had met Raj Thackeray and apologised for the use of the word “Bombay” in his film Wake Up Sid. The Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) had threatened to stall the film and had demanded an apology to the whole State from Mr. Johar.
So in a quick U-turn, the Sena, which initially had cooled down to Mr. Khan and his film release, suddenly turned violent; tearing up film screens and protesting, catching even the police by surprise. Mr. Khan, on his return to Mumbai last week, had even said he did not mind meeting Mr. Bal Thackeray but that was not a “mellowing” down. He also refused to apologise for his statement as demanded by the party. The Sena is not used to this treatment. It is used to people asking for approval, seeking the blessings of Mr. Bal Thackeray, apologising if necessary. Worse, Mr. Johar was the same man who apologised to its arch rival, the MNS, only a few months ago.
Politically for the Sena, its Marathi agenda has been hijacked by the MNS and Mr. Raj Thackeray. Even if the media accounts of Rahul Gandhi’s train journey are ecstatic, it did take everyone by surprise. The Sena tried to be stoic by saying that Mr. Gandhi was forced to change his route and take the train due to the party’s opposition to his visit, but deep down it knows the truth. The Congress went to town saying that the train journey was a fitting reply to the Sena’s protests against his statements on Mumbai. Mr. Gandhi travelled unhindered through the city while Sainiks feebly demonstrated here and there.
The turf war for the Marathi vote is dragging to low levels. Though elections to the city corporation are two years away, the Sena has lost so much ground that it needs time to recover and prepare to retain the corporation which it is ruling for a second term. Unlike other parties, fear has been central to the Sena’s agenda. Why did Mr. Bal Thackeray emerge as the remote control of the State? It was the fear of the party’s lumpen cadres that kept people at home during strikes called by the Sena. The fear of violence and retribution. The streets used to empty out and people thought twice before risking their lives.
All that has changed. An ailing leader, an heir who is soft-spoken and cadres who are in disarray cannot do much to sustain the hate agenda of the Sena. It is a party that has little else on board. By focusing on Mr. Khan’s statement favouring the inclusion of Pakistani players in IPL, the Sena has taken a convoluted path of protest by stalling the film release starring the actor.
It is an agitation that must be read correctly. It is an agitation to intimidate, instil fear, and show once again that the Sena is a force to reckon with. It wants to put the police and the Congress-led government in its place. Those who don’t pay obeisance, please take note. The remote control is back.
72 ) Obama softens stance on Wall Street bonuses
Andrew Clark
U.S. President Barack Obama has praised the bosses of Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan as “very savvy” and insisted he does not “begrudge” them their success and wealth, in a significant softening of the White House’s attitude towards multimillion-dollar Wall Street bonuses.
Once a staunch critic of outsized pay packets, Mr. Obama adopted a strikingly consensual tone when asked this week about a $9-million bonus awarded to Goldman’s Lloyd Blankfein and a $17-million payday granted to JP Morgan’s Jamie Dimon.
“I know both those guys, they are very savvy businessmen,” Mr. Obama said in a interview with Bloomberg’s BusinessWeek magazine. “I, like most of the American people, don’t begrudge people success or wealth. That is part of the free-market system.” And he praised the fact that Goldman and JP Morgan were using long-term share awards, rather than cash, to pay bonuses to their senior executives.
Although the White House denied any changed in direction on the issue of bonuses, Mr. Obama’s comments were far less strident than his past condemnations of rewards on Wall Street. Shortly after taking office last year, he described bonus payouts by banks as “the height of irresponsibility”.
73 ) Corrections and clarifications
* * The seventh paragraph of a report “Chandrayaan’s M3 discovers new lunar rock type” (February 10, 2010) was “The general composition of the area observed had a low abundance of mafic minerals and a high abundance of feldspathic minerals such as pyroxene.” Pyroxene is a mafic mineral.
* * The seventh paragraph in a report “Nitin Gadkari formally elected BJP chief” (February 10, 2010) was “[General Secretary Thawarchand] Gehlot said organisational elections were completed in 19 States and would be over in the remaining 11 in the next few months. Under the party constitution, at least 50 per cent of the States have to complete the State-level election process before the national president is elected. In all the 19 States, the election has been by ‘consensus’ with not a single contest.” There was a query on how the report mentioned 30 States, as India has 28 States and seven Union territories. The Special Correspondent clarifies that the BJP’s organisational elections have been held in 19 States and Union Territories — the report did not mention union territories. Party elections in 11 more States and Union Territories are due. The BJP does not have a full State unit in some places, and therefore, the number in the report added up to 30.
* * The fifth paragraph of a cricket report “Dhoni attributes outcome to Steyn’s display” (“Sport”, February 10, 2010) was “He can really bind one end for them. He’s one bowler who can bowl 30 overs out of the 90 days in the day and you can’t afford to block everything ….” It should have been “90 overs”.
* * *
It is the policy of The Hindu to correct significant errors as soon as possible. Please specify the edition (place of publication), date and page.
The Readers’ Editor’s office can be contacted by
Telephone: +91-44-28418297 (11 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday to Friday);
Fax: +91-44-28552963;
E-mail: readerseditor@thehindu.co.in
Mail: Readers’ Editor, The Hindu, Kasturi Buildings,
859 & 860 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002, India.
All communication must carry the full postal address and telephone number.
No personal visits.
The Terms of Reference for the Readers’ Editor are on www.thehindu.com
74 ) Marshalling the States
Over the past few months, the message that Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram has been delivering to Chief Ministers of the States hard-hit by Maoist violence is to prepare for tough action. Despite substantial investments in police infrastructure, and a steady surge of central forces, the Maoists face no imminent threat; the party and its armed cadre confront forces that are neither superior nor powerful. On February 9, Mr. Chidambaram held the latest in a series of meetings with Chief Ministers intended to set things right. For a variety of reasons linked to local political configurations, many States have been reluctant to join in the large-scale counter-Maoist operations. Hours before the meeting, Maoists succeeded in blowing up railway tracks in Jharkhand and Bihar. Despite this, Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar and his Jharkhand counterpart Shibu Soren failed to show up for the meeting. Earlier, Mr. Chidambaram had met with Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Raman Singh, Orissa’s Naveen Patnaik, and Maharashtra Home Minister R.R. Patil. Although Mr. Chidambaram said that progress in these States was satisfactory, the truth is that there was little success to report.
Ever since he took office as Home Minister, Mr. Chidambaram has been working hard to build a new architecture for addressing the Maoist threat, built around inter-State cooperation and intelligence-sharing. The sad truth, though, is that the bricks to support his architecture are just not in place. Ever since 2001, fatalities in the Maoist war have escalated steadily — 998 in 2009, just below the threshold widely used by scholars to define a high-intensity conflict. The escalation of violence has come at a time when other conflicts across the country, from Jammu and Kashmir to the North-East, are declining in intensity. By Mr. Chidambaram’s account, 223 districts — almost a third of India’s total — now face Maoist violence. While it is not true that Maoists control these territories, sustained violence has been witnessed in the jurisdiction of about 400 police stations in 90 districts. Last year, civilians and security forces accounted for more than 70 per cent of fatalities, up from 66 per cent in 2008. Underlying the failure of the forces to defend themselves or the people are years of neglect of police infrastructure and manpower — neglect that is impossible to set right in months, perhaps even years. Defeating the Maoists, as Andhra Pradesh has demonstrated, is indeed possible. It will require bottom-up commitment and hard work, though — something few States seem willing to engage in, the Union Home Minister’s efforts notwithstanding.
75) Return to bipartisanship
Bipartisanship, abandoned in the United States Congress over the last one year, may soon re-emerge. There have been several signs of a new, less rancorous style of American politics making its appearance this year. Last month saw a president-endorsed proposal come up for a bipartisan Senate commission to tackle the worrisome question of how to reduce the spiralling federal deficit. Though many senior Republicans were on board, the proposal did not survive the Senate vote that could have given it life. However in a rare departure from their usual lockstep voting pattern against contentious Democratic bills, 16 Republicans voted in favour of establishing the commission. Further, President Obama’s recent announcement of a bipartisan caucus on healthcare reform may portend an era of more consensual politics. While the discussants are likely to remain polarised on key dimensions of the legislation, the very act of meeting gives the reform effort a fighting chance through what Mr. Obama plainly described as “give-and-take.”
There are two factors hastening the return of bipartisan discourse in Washington. First, the stunning loss of the Massachusetts seat and the prospect of further Congressional defeats in November this year have compelled Mr. Obama to make serious efforts to bring the Republicans on board. He has good reason to do so — the “blanket hold” that Republican Senator Richard Shelby placed on 70-odd executive appointments (until $40 billion federal earmarks favouring his state were agreed) was a flagrant display of opportunism that may well become more recurrent. The reality is that the Obama administration is negotiating a complex matrix of policy goals — including job creation and economic recovery, deficit management, healthcare reform and several difficult areas of U.S. foreign policy engagement — and he needs a measure of Republican support to achieve this. Secondly, it is hardly surprising that the Republicans, still lacking strong leadership and a workable alternative to the Democratic agenda, are fixating on sound-byte-rich subjects such as healthcare reform and the deficit. Given the frustrations of sitting in opposition during a year when far-reaching policies were enacted, they will have to choose between sharing some of the responsibility of governing through bipartisan engagement and risking the charge of obstructionism via unnecessary filibuster. Under these circumstances, the President would do well to nurture the still-nascent initiative of reaching out across party lines, thus preventing partisan bitterness from bringing the legislative and executive processes to their knees.
76) Towards relevant medical education
M.S. Seshadri & K.S. Jacob
Basic medical education transmits information regarding health problems without equipping students with the necessary skills to manage them, forcing doctors to specialise. The need to revamp medical education is compelling and urgent.
Basic medical education and training should be tailored to (i) develop appropriate manpower to meet common health needs, (ii) recognise and manage common health problems, (iii) teach critical appraisal of new information to keep abreast of advances, and (iv) ensure ethical practice. The current system falls far short of these objectives. The lack of relevance of medical education in India has been highlighted in medical literature. The World Health Organisation published its recommendations of “Reorienting medical education” (ROME) in 1991, arguing for major shifts in the educational model. Yet, two decades after the proposal, the changes made have been minimal and superficial; training continues to be inappropriate and inadequate for meeting the health needs of the country.
The standards and setting: The pyramid of health-seeking has its base in informal household remedies, traditional medicine and primary care, and moves through secondary hospitals with tertiary care facilities at its apex. The vast majority of patients seek outpatient services in clinics and small hospitals. A small proportion visits — and an even smaller fraction is admitted to — tertiary care centres. The referral patterns of tertiary hospitals make uncommon conditions presenting at these centres appear common with the exotic seeming standard. Since medical colleges in India operate at the level of tertiary care centres, such uncommon conditions are used for educating India’s basic physicians. The medical colleges, modelled on European-American institutions, retain their colonial inappropriateness. A model, with its focus on local reality (for example, as used in Cuba), is probably more suitable.
The curriculum: In India, the medical college setting, with its different specialities, drives the medical curriculum. Systems and areas of expertise are organised into separate departments, each with a narrow focus and circumscribed field. The demands of the specialty, the teachers and the settings are the factors that tailor medical education rather than the needs of the population they are meant to serve. The failure to develop simple and relevant guidelines for the management of common local medical problems implies a reliance on strategies meant for developed countries. While the need for clinically relevant basic science education is often discussed, in reality, the curriculum continues to be loaded with inconsequential detail.
The examination system: In practice, the systems of examinations have a greater impact on the approach of students to education than the curriculum. The tertiary care focus results in the use of uncommon conditions for assessment during clinical examinations. For example, mitral valve stenosis, an uncommon condition, is a standard case for the final clinical examination, while common conditions (diabetes mellitus, hypertension) are never used for assessment. A medical graduate can pass this examination without ever having been assessed on the diagnosis and management of malaria, endemic in many parts of the country.
Knowledge, skill and confidence: Most medical colleges focus on the transmission of information to students. Many new subjects have been added to the curriculum at the cost of basic clinical medicine and surgery. The acquisition of skills and the confidence to apply them are limited. The emphasis is on arriving at a clinical diagnosis, while a hands-on approach to the management of patients is not stressed. Clerkships during the course and exposure to secondary hospital settings are the exception than the rule and, even when present, occur for short periods. Internship is fragmented with brief periods spent in many specialties. The superficial and theoretical approach to patient care makes students less competent doctors. The general population realises this lack of skill and shops for specialist care. Young graduates also quickly appreciate this deficiency and seek postgraduate qualifications in order to acquire clinical expertise. Seeking a postgraduate qualification is a survival strategy for most doctors, rather than a choice based on aptitude or one based on need. The long periods of training, investment and specialisation in urban-based tertiary centres make doctors reluctant and less suited to work in rural primary and secondary health facilities.
Role models and mentors: Young medical students see their seniors as role models and their teachers as mentors. However, even good medical teachers, while emphasising clinical skills and focussing on common conditions that affect the health of the majority of the general population, are seen to pay lip service to these goals by actually practising in tertiary care facilities. Their actions speak louder than their words and their message of clinical care and service to the underprivileged sounds hollow. In fact, the resistance of the majority of the faculty to change the status quo was one of the major reasons for the failure of the “ROME” effort to get off the ground.
Knowledge, data and official policy: Medical professionals in India tend to quote knowledge acquired from the West. Research is often considered a luxury we cannot afford. The lack of involvement of teachers in clinical research on common problems contributes to the lack of local information. Official statistics constantly underestimate the problems on the ground. For example, 3 million cases of malaria per year are reported officially while unofficial estimates put the figure many fold higher. The use of chloroquine prophylaxis for pregnant women in areas endemic for malaria is opposed by the official policy, citing medication resistance based on research data from other countries and from small pockets in India, whereas doctors working in remote areas find such prophylaxis helpful. The official tuberculosis policy recommends anti-tuberculosis medication without nutrition supplementation, when local evidence suggests better recovery rates with the addition of food to the medication regime.
The significant differences between official perception and reality make teaching medicine difficult. Teachers are caught between quoting official statistics and policy and preparing students for examinations rather than preparing them for the ground reality.
The way forward
With capitalistic thought gaining ground, the Alma Ata Declaration “Health For All by 2000” was abandoned, primary health care initiatives were diluted and the ROME programme was not just stalled but also forgotten. The solutions pursued are “add-ons” without evaluation of the current system and its major shortcomings.
Solutions for the absence of skill-based training during undergraduate medical education are postgraduate courses, including family medicine and the master’s course in medicine and surgery. These belatedly correct the lack of skill among undergraduate doctors. The scarcity of doctors to man hospitals in rural India has prompted the recently conceived course, bachelor of rural health care. This option will improve essential services in rural areas but will divide practitioners on the basis of quality and quantity of training. Neither approach will correct the fundamental problem of the absence of the required skill and confidence among new physicians.
The compulsory posting of new physicians to rural health centres will also have a limited impact on health care delivery. The insufficient skill and confidence of these doctors will result in the continuation of second class health care for the rural poor, the underprivileged and the marginalised.
There is a need to revamp basic medical education. Tinkering and cosmetic changes, as attempted over the past few decades, will not have any impact on the quality of basic doctors. Focus on clinical medicine and the transfer of the necessary skill and confidence are essential. There is a need for patient and community-centred medicine and for the dismantling of disciplinary and specialist boundaries during undergraduate medical education.
Training should be set in primary care and secondary hospital facilities, which is crucial to learn about common health problems in the community and to manage them without expensive technological input. Testing of skills required for working in primary care and in secondary hospitals, rather than the practice of assessing theoretical knowledge of uncommon disorders, is mandatory for success. Physicians with skills to manage common problems in the community will make good general practitioners, be ideal gatekeepers for referral to specialists and follow up patients with the help of advice from tertiary care, consequently becoming the mainstay of the system.
The current approaches to undergraduate medical education do not meet the challenge of managing the basic health needs. Unless fundamental course corrections are made, undergraduate medical education in India is bound to flounder and produce doctors who lack the skill and confidence to manage common diseases and illnesses in the population. The imperative is to re-work medical education and to re-orient training to make it relevant to meet the health needs of the country. The system needs to struggle and transform itself with better and appropriate science and more humanity to make it responsive to societal needs.
(Professors Seshadri and Jacob are on the faculty of the Christian Medical College, Vellore.)
77) joseph Stiglitz feels depressed. Having been a voice in the wilderness urging caution when financial capitalism was in a speculative frenzy, he wants the crisis to be the catalyst for radical thinking. But he fears it won’t be: Greece is being forced to cut its deficit, the bankers are behaving as if nothing has changed since August 2007, and the political running in the United States is being made by the right-wing anti-state Tea Party.
“There was a moment of euphoria when we were all Keynesians,” he said in an interview to mark the publication of his new book (see note below). “Those ideas were working and every government stood behind them. It was not just Keynesian macro-economic policies, it was the need for regulation and the recognition that economics had failed.”
Since those heady days of optimism a year ago, when unprecedented government action hauled the global economy back from the brink of a new Depression, Stiglitz says two things have happened to derail prospects of change. “Plans to re-regulate the financial markets have run into a political quagmire and there has been a resurgence of deficit fetishism.”
Pessimistic
He says he is surprised at how fast the forces in favour of the pre-2007 status quo have re-grouped and believes business as usual will store up problems for the future. “The optimist in me is hopeful that we won’t need another crisis to finally motivate the political process,” he said. “The pessimist in me says it may need to happen.”
Now 67, Stiglitz has been a critic of the Chicago School of free-market economics and its international cousin — the Washington consensus — throughout his career. His trenchant objections to the deflationary policies imposed on Asian countries by the International Monetary Fund in the late 1990s led to him being ousted as the World Bank’s chief economist after lobbying from Bill Clinton’s treasury secretary, Larry Summers. (Stiglitz’s nemesis is now head of Barack Obama’s National Economic Council).
Since then, he has written books on the defects in globalisation, the 1990s boom, the cost of the Iraq war and now his take on the Great Recession. Freefall attacks all the familiar Stiglitz betes noires: the IMF, the U.S. Treasury, the Federal Reserve, Wall Street, the mainstream economics profession and, of course, Larry Summers.
He is a “big supporter” of the plans Barack Obama announced last month to stop Wall Street banks speculating with customers’ money and wishes they had gone further. Significantly, the initiative only happened when the President stopped listening to Summers, Tim Geithner, the Treasury Secretary and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, and turned instead to the veteran policy-maker Paul Volcker.
“I’m pretty pessimistic about the U.S. It will be a long time before unemployment returns to normal. The economy is not doing well.” He believes the still-struggling housing market — where 25 per cent of households are in negative equity — may harm one of America’s traditional strengths: the ability of workers to move from state to state in search of jobs. He says U.S. banks are hiding their exposure to commercial real estate, which he fears will be the next problem.
Despite the pick-up in growth across the global economy in the latter half of 2009, Stiglitz says the improvement will not last. “The likelihood that growth will slow is close to 100 per cent. The likelihood that it will drop below zero is uncertain. We don’t know about the policy response, we don’t know whether there will be a second stimulus package in the U.S., and we don’t know how bad the balance sheets of the banks are.”
For the past couple of weeks, Stiglitz has been advising the Greek government on how to respond to its severe financial crisis. He says the speculators are not basing their decisions on what they think but are gambling on what they think other people will think about Greece. “They are gambling on the degree of irrationality going forward.”
Europe, he says, should stand behind the Greeks and show “social solidarity.” The European Central Bank provides liquidity to solvent banks to help them through the bad times, and should treat Greece in the same fashion.
“Governments had to come in after the banks mismanaged what they were supposed to do. The financial markets are now criticising countries for picking up the pieces after the financial markets failed. They are demanding the wages of workers be cut but bonuses be allowed to continue. This is an absurd situation.”
Europe, he says, could float bonds to provide finance for the Greeks but adds that the crisis has exposed a fault line in the single currency. From the outset, Stiglitz said, critics argued that the test of the euro would be when the poorer countries on the periphery came under pressure and lacked the ability both to devalue and to access financial support from the richer parts of the euro area. “That problem was swept under the rug but has now come to the fore.”
Stiglitz has long been a supporter of a financial transaction tax, the brainchild of his fellow American Keynesian James Tobin. This week a coalition of groups launched a campaign for a “Robin Hood tax” that would levy a small charge on financial transactions and re-distribute the proceeds. “A transaction tax is designed to tackle high-frequency activity for which it is hard to find any societal benefit,” Stiglitz said.
“The only questions about a financial transaction tax is: can it be effectively implemented and can it be circumvented? There is a growing consensus that it can be implemented, if not perfectly then effectively enough to make a difference.” Speculators themselves supported the idea of the tax because they knew their activities were “socially counter-productive,” he claimed.
Wrinkles
Stiglitz won his Nobel prize for his work on asymmetric information, the notion that markets do not work as perfectly as textbooks suggest. “It is almost impossible to reconcile the description of the economy provided by the mainstream profession and what has actually been going on. These are not minor wrinkles. They acted as if the bubble would go on forever when real incomes were falling for most Americans.”
In Britain, he says of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown: “They didn’t go far enough in correcting the Thatcher revolution. In trying not to over-react they under-reacted.”
But George Osborne is precisely the sort of “deficit fetishist” Stiglitz has in his sights. Incredulous at the idea that the Conservatives would cut spending when the economy is barely out of recession, he thinks Osborne would take a different view in power. “He originally talked about big deficit cuts but seems to have backed off that in terms of timing. The reason they are doing that is that if they did it the recession would get much worse. If they get elected, they will move from rhetoric to reality.”
In the years ahead, Stiglitz says the big story will be the challenge to the west from China and India, a development hastened by the crisis. There was a time when emerging economies had no choice but to accept the free-market policies imposed by Washington. “The U.S. treasury would be laughed out of town if it went to China or India today and told them they had to de-regulate.
“We can now see a day when the dominance of the west will end.”
(Note: Freefall: Free Markets and the Sinking of the Global Economy is published by Allen Lane.)
— © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
78) In May, 2008 when A.P. Shah took over as Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, he came with a reputation. He had spent the larger part of his career in the Bombay High Court, where he had ruled that no political party had a legal right to call for a bandh because it violated the fundamental rights of Bombayites. He made the Shiv Sena and the BJP deposit fines of 20 lakh rupees each, and directed that the money be used to improve public services in the city. In another case, Justice Shah had prevented the Maharashtra government from suppressing Doordarshan’s telecast of a film about terrorism in Punjab and Ram Ke Naam, a documentary about the Ayodhya issue. At the Madras High Court, where Justice Shah had spent two years building up the infrastructure of justice delivery, he set up a child centre in the family court, mediation centres in the districts and decentralised training programmes for judges.
Standing at the back of Court No.1 in Delhi, while complaining about the heat and the parking, a small group of public interest lawyers noted his arrival with measured hope.
On Thursday the same lawyers, joined by many more, gave Justice Shah a standing ovation at his farewell. They came in such large numbers that even the cavernous Court No.1 could not contain them, and large screens were set up in the corridors and atrium to relay the event. In less than two years as Chief Justice of Delhi, Justice Shah’s name has become associated with a number of rulings that have changed the city, but many people will remember him for the judgment that decriminalised homosexuality.
When the Delhi High Court limited Section 377 to protect consensual gay sex, they did so on constitutional grounds so stringent that the Central government hesitated to appeal the order, despite having lost. It is true that historical events like this aren’t achieved by a single man alone. There was much serendipity behind the decision, the breadth and form of which hadn’t even been expected by optimistic queer activists. To begin with, next to Justice Shah sat Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar, a man with a long experience of human rights jurisprudence and the criminal law. For once, the weight of legal argument and research was on the side of the marginalised. The lawyers arguing for decriminalisation were Anand Grover, an experienced human rights lawyer and the dynamic, young Senior Counsel Shyam Divan. Divan also brought to the case the personal education and commitment that comes from having a prominent queer activist as a family member. Their arguments were fed with solid research by a dedicated team of young lawyers in cities across the country, and supported by arguments emailed in by Oxford faculty. But without the leadership of Justice Shah, even Aristotle’s arguments could not have succeeded.
The 377 judgment drew media attention to the winds of change rustling through the High Court. In subsequent months, Justice Shah, Justice Muralidhar and other associates on the Bench have become something of a newspaper phenomenon, punctuating timely rulings with direct, apt critique. For instance, when an overzealous Delhi government was on its way to sending beggars back to their native states, Shah and Muralidhar intervened to stop them. “Poverty is not a crime,” they observed. “It’s strange that a criminal can reside in the city but if someone is asking for alms, then he is thrown away.”
Last month, as temperatures dropped to 4 degrees, the MCD demolished a night shelter for the homeless on Pusa road. Responding to a newspaper article, Justice Shah and Justice Endlaw directed the MCD to restore the shelter immediately, demanding “(The) Commonwealth Games is after 10 months, and for the city’s beautification you will throw out people in a chilling winter like this?” The MCD has now been directed to draw up a plan to construct 144 permanent shelters for the homeless across the city.
In a stream of rulings like these above, Justice Shah has led bench after bench in defending those very ordinary Dilliwalas — cycle-rikhshawalas, the disabled, slum-dwellers and most recently the victims of the 1984 massacres — whom no one else has time to remember.
Very recently, the Supreme Court itself made a rare, self-critical comment. “Of late, there has been a visible shift in the courts approach in dealing with the cases involving the interpretation of social welfare legislations,” said the ruling, authored by Justice Singhvi. “The attractive mantras of globalisation and liberalisation are fast becoming the raison d’etre of the judicial process.” In a time when the government and the judiciary have fallen into a hard consensus on corporate-led development, modest regard is paid to its social and environmental cost. Many courts place implicit trust in the intentions of companies and in the idea that any corporate interest result directly in the improvement of the lives of others. The time spent on corporate disputes has increased as the importance given to matters concerning the underprivileged has fallen.
It’s this context that has made Justice Shah’s court an extraordinary one. Late last year, a judgment of Justice Shah’s reminded a corporation of its obligations to pay the city back, he directed Apollo Hospitals to give 33 per cent of its beds and 40 per cent of its Out Patient services for free, as they’re legally bound, saying, “Health care… cannot be left to be regulated solely by the invisible hands of the market.”
During his brief tenure on the bench, Justice Shah’s judgments have held off some of the Darwinian forces trying to morph Delhi into a city free of too-poor people. When Justice Shah retires, the mark of his work will be the relief of India’s gay and transgender citizens, sick Indians receiving healthcare, disabled people with government jobs and children who have a place to sleep tonight.
(Karuna Nundy is a Delhi-based advocate.)
Corrections and clarifications
* * In an article “Climate change and the Copenhagen discord” (“Speaking Of Science -- Science & Technology” page, February 11, 2010), the weblink given in the fifth paragraph (http://old.eseindia.org/equitywatch.asp) should have been http://old.cseindia.org/equitywatch.asp
* * It’s Wangari Maathai, and not Wangari Mathai (winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, 2004) as said in the third paragraph of a report “With women at helm, developed nation status not far away: Kalam” (Tamil Nadu, February 12, 2010).
* * Mr. Anand Sharma is Minister of Commerce and Industry. The last paragraph of a report “India, Britain ink nuclear pact” (February 12, 2010) incorrectly said that he is Minister of State for Commerce.
* * A sentence in the fourth paragraph of a report “Police crack down on Sainiks, tighten security in theatres” (February 11, 2010, page 1) was “Ship-owners briefly downed the shutters, resulting in a bandh-like situation.” It’s “shop-owners”.
* * A clarification in connection with an item “GATE centre” (Kochi, February 11, 2010, page 3) which said that the School of Engineering at the Thrikkakara campus of the Cochin University of Science and Technology will be the Kochi centre for the GATE 2010 conducted by the Indian Institute of Technology on February 14.
The Chairman, GATE, IIT-Madras clarifies: The GATE 2010 examination is being conducted in Kochi/Ernakulam in nine centres by IIT-Madras. About 4,800 candidates are appearing at Kochi. The centres allotted in the admit card (except the Rajagiri School of Management) are the centres, and candidates are requested to report at the centres as per the admit card. The news item pertains to only one centre at CUSAT.
* * *
It is the policy of The Hindu to correct significant errors as soon as possible. Please specify the edition (place of publication), date and page.
The Readers’ Editor’s office can be contacted by
Telephone: +91-44-28418297/28576300 (11 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday to Friday);
Fax: +91-44-28552963;
E-mail: readerseditor@thehindu.co.in
Mail: Readers’ Editor, The Hindu, Kasturi Buildings,
859 & 860 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002, India.
All communication must carry the full postal address and telephone number.
No personal visits.
The Terms of Reference for the Readers’ Editor are on www.thehindu.com
79) Crafting an agenda for talks
When the Foreign Secretaries of India and Pakistan meet in New Delhi on February 25, the challenge before them is to craft an agenda and a schedule for continuous interaction despite each having a very different set of immediate priorities. For India, ensuring sustained and effective action against terrorist groups based in Pakistan is the one issue that tops all others. Pakistan, on the other hand, is most concerned about water-related disputes, a relatively new ‘co re issue’ in the already fraught bilateral relationship. The fact that Islamabad wants to talk about water does not square with its demand for the immediate resumption of the composite dialogue, since the latter includes just one of many current and future disputes, the Wullar Barrage-Tulbul navigation project on the Jhelum river. To that extent, India’s proposal for an open-ended agenda for the Foreign Secretaries’ meeting actually provides the two countries a more flexible format for official interaction on the issues that really animate them than the formal dialogue process which still lies suspended.
Saturday’s terrorist attack in Pune may or may not be the handiwork of Pakistan-based groups but the target and timing of the bomb blast have clearly been designed to evoke a comparison with the strike that took place in Mumbai in November 2008. The fact that, at a rally in Islamabad on February 5, a Jamaat-ud-Dawa spokesman threatened to target the Maharashtra city is also a reminder of the unfinished business Pakistan has to attend to on the terrorism front if it wants to build confidence and trust with India. In the absence of such confidence, talks can and should continue but it is hard to see how meaningful progress can be made on the water issue. India is not violating the Indus Waters Treaty and if Pakistan thinks it is, going for international arbitration is always an option. But as the upper riparian, there is much that India could do on its territory to develop and recharge the Indus river basin, which straddles the two countries. As the lower riparian, it is in Pakistan’s interest to seek Indian cooperation in a joint venture of this kind. That would require winning India’s trust, which, in turn, would require ensuring that the tap of terror is not just turned off but dismantled. In her meeting with her Pakistani counterpart, the Indian Foreign Secretary can do no better than to repeat what Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said in Parliament last year: that India is prepared to meet Pakistan’s concerns on water or any other issue more than half-way provided Islamabad implements its commitments and acts against terrorist groups.
80 ) The show does go on
Like the storyline in a regulation Bollywood movie, the good guys finally won. The Shiv Sena’s diktat that the Shahrukh Khan-starrer My Name Is Khan must not be screened in Maharashtra has been met with welcome defiance with a clutch of multiplexes and cinema halls premiering the film on Friday. Many more that were initially reluctant to screen the film due to fear of violence and arson by Sena hooligans have overcome their apprehensions, resulting in the blockbuster being released in many parts of the State. A good part of the credit for refusing to be terrorised by Bal Thackeray’s storm troopers must go to a spirited public, particularly in Mumbai, which flocked to the cinema halls not only to see the film but also to cock a snook at the Sena. The Maharashtra government must also be commended for providing the enough security to make the cinema hall owners feel it was safe to release the film. But it is Shahrukh Khan himself who deserves the most praise for standing up to the Sena and for refusing to take the easy way out. The actor and co-owner of the Kolkata Knight Riders flatly rejected the Sena’s absurd demand that he apologise for saying Pakistani cricketers should have been picked for the Indian Premier League, if they were to allow his films to be released in Maharashtra.
The Bollywood film industry, which is acutely aware that box office collections in Maharashtra are critical to a film’s success, has traditionally kowtowed to the Sena and like-minded organisations. A few months ago, My Name is Khan’s director, Karan Johar, was coerced into apologising to Mr. Bal Thackeray’s estranged nephew Raj Thackeray after his Maharashtra Navnirman Sena hooligans stopped the screening of another of his films because it used the word ‘Bombay’ instead of ‘Mumbai.’ A welcome consequence of Mr. Khan’s decision to stand firm is that it has emboldened a section of the film industry to come out in his defence. The strong backlash against the Shiv Sena for attacking Mr. Khan (Mr. Thackeray went as far as calling him a “traitor’) is similar to what the organisation faced after criticising another national icon, Sachin Tendulkar, for saying that Mumbai belongs to India. Politically weakened after Mr. Raj Thackeray left to form the MNS, Mr. Bal Thackeray seems to be locked in a contest of competitive chauvinism with his nephew, with each trying to outdo the other by aggressively searching for ways to be in the public eye. The widespread revulsion against this form of parochial politics should consolidate the efforts to isolate parties such as the Shiv Sena and the MNS and demonstrate that the rule of law will prevail over threats and orchestrated violence.
81) China challenges Obama’s Taliban plan
M.K. Bhadrakumar
Chinese commentaries have questioned the efficacy of the U.S. plan to “reintegrate” the Taliban, saying it is a deeply flawed idea.
U.S. President Barack Obama’s plan to reconcile with the Taliban in Afghanistan ought to win him a second Nobel, although during the entire period between 1901 and 2009, a Peace Prize was never awarded twice to any of its 97 individual recipients. An exception of course can be made. From a historical perspective, if the Obama plan advances, Afghanistan promises to become the first country where Islamists are ushered into power on a wave of America’s smart powe r. That is no mean achievement.
However, there is always a catch somewhere. Curiously, it is Beijing that will have the final say in the matter. And these days Beijing cannot be persuaded until it is convinced. Its considerations will be solely guided by China’s national interests at the prospect of an Islamist regime resurfacing in Central Asia — a prospect that is entirely within the realms of possibility and is fraught with grave implications for China’s security. The fact of the matter is, as NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said at the Munich security conference last weekend: “Of course Afghanistan is not an island. There is no solution just within its borders.”
The international community has been led to believe that the India-Pakistan fault line is the pivotal concern in the U.S.’s diplomatic strategy in Afghanistan. However, it is more a subplot. The U.S.’s principal protagonist is China, while India and Pakistan — and increasingly Russia — are more like jesters in forming the confusion and the humour in an Elizabethan drama. The main plot is about the expansion of NATO in Central Asia.
At Munich, Mr. Rasmussen spoke of the “need to turn NATO into a forum of consultation on worldwide security issues … NATO is a framework, which has already proven to be uniquely able to combine security consultation, military planning and actual operations … Afghanistan is a vivid example that, in the 21st century, security can’t be a relay race, with one individual handing the baton to the next runner ... That is why … the Alliance should become the hub of a network of security partnerships … Already today, the Alliance has a vast network of security partnership, as far afield as Northern Africa, the Gulf, Central Asia and the Pacific.”
The Central Asian region is increasingly projected in the western media as a “ticking bomb waiting to go off.” The argument runs like this: social and ethnic tensions are smouldering in the region and the economic crisis is deepening whereas the autocratic and repressive regimes are incapable of addressing the tensions; Islamists are, therefore, stepping into the political vacuum and Central Asia is becoming increasingly susceptible to the al-Qaeda. The argument is gaining ground. Pakistani analyst Ahmed Rashid said recently: “[Militants] are preparing the ground for a long, sustained military campaign in Central Asia. There is now a real threat because the Islamist surge is combined with an economic and political crisis … The reason is that they have, first of all, done enough fighting for other people. They now want to fight for their own country. The real threat now is the fact that they are trying to infiltrate back into Central Asia … They are trying to infiltrate weapons, ammunition and men back into Central Asia.” There is an ominous overtone to it. The al-Qaeda was used as a justification for the overthrow of Saddam Hussein and Yemen is fast becoming eligible for a U.S. intervention on the same account. This is why the U.S.’s idea of reconciliation with the Taliban merits close scrutiny.
Prima facie, the idea is eminently sensible at a time when Muslim anger is rising, there is growing disillusionment about Mr. Obama and the U.S. is dangerously close to confronting Iran. Besides, it is always sound tactic to “split” Muslim opinion. The idea of inducting Saudi Arabia as the mediator with the Taliban is a masterstroke. There couldn’t be a better way to further harass the Shi’ite regime in Tehran than by injecting a heavy dose of Wahhabism into neighbouring Afghanistan. Indeed, that was a prime consideration in the mid-1990s at the time of the conception of the Taliban by the U.S., Saudi Arabia and Pakistan as a joint enterprise.
To be sure, the Taliban’s reconciliation makes the stuff of realpolitik. The Afghan war costs lots of money, it costs youthful western lives and it cannot be won. The Taliban reconciliation is arguably the only option available to keep open-ended NATO’s military presence in Central Asia without having to fight a futile war. Secondly, the ascendancy of malleable Islamist forces also has its uses for the U.S.’s containment strategy towards China (and Russia). The cold war testifies to the seamless possibilities of pitting Islam against communism. In today’s circumstances, the triumph of Islamists in Afghanistan cannot but radicalise regional hotspots such as North Caucasus, Kashmir or Xinjiang.
China has the maximum to lose if a Taliban regime reemerges. Islamists can create havoc with China’s plans to source Central Asian energy through transportation routes that bypass U.S.-controlled Malacca Straits. The “foreign devils” can complicate the situation within Xinjiang. Worse still, China may come to inherit the Soviet Union’s plight as the “enemy” of Islam. That explains the length to which Beijing went at the London conference on Afghanistan on January 28 and at the Istanbul regional conference immediately preceding it to assert that Afghanistan is far too critical an issue for regional security and stability to be left to Washington.
Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi spelt out in great deal during his speeches at London and Istanbul that Beijing intends to play an active role to safeguard its interests. Mr. Yang outlined the kind of Afghanistan that China wishes to see emerging out of the abyss. First and foremost, it has to be a peaceful and stable Afghanistan that “eradicates the threat of terrorism.” Two, it should be an Afghanistan that accepts the “existence of diverse ethnic groups, religions and political affiliations and rises above their differences to achieve comprehensive and enduring national reconciliation.” The accent on pluralism is a virtual rejection of the fundamentalist ideology of Wahhabism practised by the Pashtun-dominated Taliban. Three, Afghanistan should “enjoy inviolable sovereign independence, territorial integrity and national dignity. Its future and destiny should be determined and its state affairs run by its own people.” In essence, China expects a total and unconditional vacation of foreign occupation.
Four, Mr. Yang highlighted repeatedly, the centrality of the regional powers in the efforts to stabilise Afghanistan. Afghanistan “should be a part of the regional cooperation mechanisms… Countries of the region have special associations with Afghanistan.” He added: “There are now quite a number of mechanisms and initiatives regarding Afghanistan. Countries in the region should increase communication to ensure that the relevant mechanisms are viable, practical and efficient and can play a positive role … We should avoid [the] overlapping of various mechanisms … we should be open and inclusive and promote sound interaction with other partners … It is imperative to respect the leading role of the United Nations in coordinating international efforts and demonstrate openness and transparency.”
Mr. Yang then added a punch line: “Countries from outside the region should vigorously support the efforts of countries in the region and fully appreciate their difficulties in order to foster sound interactions between the two.” In effect, he challenged the U.S.’s monopoly of conflict resolution. Mr. Yang demanded that the Obama administration get off the back of Hamid Karzai. He asked Washington to “respect the leading role of Afghanistan in economic reconstruction and let the Afghan government and people sit in the driver’s seat. China supports channelling more assistance through the Afghan government and making more investment ... on the basis of equal consultations with the Afghan government.”
Chinese commentaries have since questioned the efficacy of the Obama administration’s plan to “reintegrate” the Taliban, saying it is a deeply flawed idea and raises concerns that Mr. Karzai may be ultimately forced into making “certain political concessions” to the insurgents in terms of power-sharing and constitutional reform. They lamented that the entire exercise aimed at “a graceful exit strategy” for the U.S. and its allies and “appears to have been carefully stage-managed to allow the U.S. and NATO troops to start scripting a withdrawal. But perceived in a certain light, it could be counter-productive.”
The Chinese commentaries underlined that the plan to split the Taliban by buying off its cadres and reintegrating those who had no link with the al-Qaeda wouldn’t work. “The United States has always tried to spend its way into a solution, a tactic that could backfire with the more extreme element of the Taliban … the prospect conjures images of a bottomless money pit.”
Almost word-by-word, Mr. Yang’s Indian counterpart could have echoed him at the London conference. Yet, New Delhi preferred to let one more opportunity pass by when India could have made common cause with other like-minded regional powers that share our profound sense of disquiet about the ascendancy of militant forces in Afghanistan.
(The writer is a former diplomat.)
82) Building stability in India-Pakistan relations
High-level Track II meeting suggests way to take forward the bilateral relationship.
Senior former officials (including Ambassadors, Foreign Secretaries, Intelligence Chiefs and top-ranking members of the Armed Forces), academics, journalists and political leaders from India and Pakistan conducted a comprehensive two-day dialogue in Bangkok, Thailand, on February 8-9 on a range of issues impacting on the relationship. Terrorism, Jammu and Kashmir, hydro-resources, Afghanistan and nuclear stability were some of the issues discussed.
Welcoming the decision by the two governments to resume the official bilateral dialogue at the Foreign Secretary level, participants at the Chaophraya Dialogue agreed to the following:
1. Peace between and stability in India-Pakistan relations is essential for the well being of South Asia. After nearly 63 years of hostility between India and Pakistan, it is critical that all stakeholders work for sustainable peace between the two countries. Civil societies in India and Pakistan, by and large, support the goal of peace and reconciliation; peace constituencies in both countries must, therefore, be further strengthened by providing them greater space and support. It is essential that the trust deficit and the burden of history not be allowed to impact on the task of moving relations forward.
2. Trust can be best built through multiple uninterruptible dialogues, positive incremental steps, Confidence and Trust-building Measures, and most critically through acts of statesmanship by the leaders of the two countries.
3. A grand reconciliation can only be ensured, in the long-term, through engagement at every level: civil society meetings, official dialogues, engagement of political leaders, cooperation between business and corporate leaders, visits of artists, sportsmen, media, talks between the armed forces, Track II engagements, etc.
4. Temporary setback in inter-governmental relations should not be allowed to impinge on people-to-people cooperation. Attempts should be made to create a visa-free regime for important stakeholders: including academics, journalists, businessmen, students, artists and former senior officials.
5. Progress made in previous rounds of talks should be carried forward in the official dialogue.
6. Terrorism is of deep concern to India and Pakistan. The memory of the Mumbai attacks is still alive and continues to inform public opinion in India. Today, terrorism and extremism pose an existential threat to Pakistan. Indian concerns about terrorism and the terrorist threats to India are as much of a serious concern for Pakistan. Terrorism and extremism need to be comprehensively and permanently defeated.
7. India and Pakistan should seriously consider initiating an institutionalised, regular but discreet dialogue between the intelligence chiefs (the heads of R&AW, IB and ISI and IB Pakistan) of both countries.
8. The back channel on Jammu and Kashmir must be resumed at an early date keeping in view the fact that all stake-holders, particularly the people of J&K, will have to be consulted at some stage. If Jammu and Kashmir is considered as a piece of real estate there is little hope of a way ahead. Therefore, the welfare of the people of Jammu and Kashmir must be considered to be of paramount concern. In this context, all agreed CBMs must be more robustly implemented.
9. The media are playing a critical role in shaping popular perceptions. They have thus a great responsibility to help strengthen the constituency for peace. A continuing dialogue between journalists, editors and proprietors of media houses is needed.
10. A sustained dialogue on ensuring strategic stability in South Asia must be an essential part of the bilateral dialogue. There is also need for discussion amongst experts on critical doctrinal issues and the need to work towards creating a Nuclear Safety, Assistance and Collaboration Regime in the region within the framework of minimum deterrence. In this context, a trilateral nuclear dialogue which includes China must also be pursued.
11. The problem of water is becoming a matter of great concern and there is a need to address misperceptions in this regard. The Indus Water Treaty has withstood the test of time and has a well established dispute-settlement mechanism. Any concern about hydro-resources of the Indus river system should be taken up through the Permanent Indus Water Commission. Within the framework of the treaty, the two countries must also share best practices on water management with each other. Environmental and other experts with domain knowledge, from both countries, must be encouraged to provide concrete recommendations for better and optimal management of hydro resources given the huge challenge that the scarcity of water will pose for the region in the future.
12. A stable, prosperous, sovereign and independent Afghanistan is in the interest of India and Pakistan and both countries must work for this goal and hold talks to allay each other’s apprehensions.
13. Track-II dialogues are designed to move beyond officially stated positions, find a way forward, and can provide alternative approaches to the governments of Pakistan and India as well as other important stakeholders. It is vital that Track II dialogues be encouraged by both New Delhi and Islamabad.
Pakistani participants: Samina Ahmed, South Asia Project Director at the International Crisis Group, Gen. (retd.) Ehsan ul Haq, former Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Amb. Aziz Ahmad Khan, former High Commissioner of Pakistan to India, Gen. (retd.) Aziz Mohammad Khan, former Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Amb. Humayun Khan, Foreign Secretary of Pakistan, Amb. Riaz Khokhar, Foreign Secretary of Pakistan, Amb. Rustam Shah Mohmand, former Ambassador of Pakistan to Afghanistan, and Sherry Rehman, Member of Parliament
Indian participants: Maj. Gen. (retd.) Dipankar Banerjee, Director, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, A.S. Dulat, former Director, Research and Analysis Wing, Sagarika Ghose, senior editor and prime time anchor, CNN-IBN, Happymon Jacob, Assistant Professor, Centre for International Politics, Organization and Disarmament, Jawaharlal Nehru University, Amitabh Mattoo, Professor, Centre for International Politics, Organization and Disarmament, Jawaharlal Nehru University, Rear Adml. (retd.) Raja Menon, Chairman, Task Force on Net Assessment and Simulation, National Security Council, Amb. G. Parthasarathy, former High Commissioner of India to Pakistan, Vikram Sood, former Director, Research and Analysis Wing, Siddharth Varadarajan, Strategic Affairs Editor and Chief of National Bureau, The Hindu.
83) The helicopters landed before dawn on Saturday, alighting in a poppy field beside a row of mud-walled compounds. The U.S. Marines ran into the darkness and crouched through the rotor-whipped dust as their aircraft lifted away.
For the Marines of Company K, 3rd Battalion, 6th Marines, the assault into the last large Taliban stronghold in Helmand province was beginning. For almost all of them, this was to be their first taste of war. And an afternoon of small-arms combat was ahead.
But at first, these Marines, the vanguard for 6,000 NATO and Afghan troops streaming in to loosen the Taliban’s grip in Afghanistan permanently, met no resistance. On the last miles of the ride in, the Marines were silent as the aircraft flew 200 feet above freshly sprouting poppy fields. Irrigation canals glittered beneath the portholes, rolling past fast.
The Marines did not know what to expect, beyond the fact that at least hundreds of insurgents were waiting for them, and that many would fight to keep their hold on the opium-poppy production centre.
Company K is part of what many Marines call a surge battalion, one of the units assigned to Afghanistan after President Barack Obama decided last year to increase the U.S. troops on the ground. It arrived in Afghanistan a month ago, and had waited for this moment. Its introduction to the war was a crash course.
As the helicopter wheels touched soil, the aircraft filled with whoops, and the Marines stood and bolted for the tail ramp. They moved briskly. Within minutes, the first Marines of the 3rd Platoon were entering compounds to the landing zone’s north, checking for enemy fighters and booby traps. The rest of the platoon followed through the gate. Sergeants and corporals urged a steady pace. “Go! Go! Go!” they said, spicing instructions with profanity. By 3 a.m., Company K had its toehold.
The company’s mission was to seize the area around the major intersection in northern Marjah, clear a village beside it and hold it. By drawing this assignment, the company had become its battalion’s lead unit — sent alone and out front into the Taliban territory. It had been told to hold its area until other companies, driving over the ground and clearing hidden explosives from the roads, worked down from the northwest and caught up.
The Second Platoon took a position to the west, to block Route 605, a main road. The First Platoon was to the east, watching over another likely Taliban avenue of approach. The Third Platoon gathered in the southernmost compounds, with orders to sweep north and clear the entire village.
The Third Platoon’s commander, 1st Lt. Adam J. Franco, ordered a halt until dawn. A canal separated the platoon from the village. The company had been warned of booby traps. Lt. Franco chose to cross the canal with daylight, reducing the risks of a Marine stepping on an unseen pressure plate that would detonate an explosive charge. “Hold tight,” he said into his radio. The non-commissioned officers paced in the blackness, counting and recounting every man.
Being the lead company had drawbacks. The Marines had been told that ground reinforcements and fresh supplies might not reach them for three days. This meant they had to carry everything they would need during that time: water, ammunition, food, first-aid equipment, a bedroll, clothes and spare batteries for radios and night-vision devices. As they jogged forward, the men grunted and swore under their burdens, which in many cases weighed 100 pounds or more. Some carried 5-gallon jugs of water, others hauled stretchers, rockets, mortar ammunition or bundles of plastic explosives and spools of time-fuse and detonating cord.
In 3rd Platoon, two teams carried collapsible aluminum footbridges, each about 25 feet long when extended, which the platoon would use to cross the canal. At daybreak, the platoon bounded across one of its bridges and into the village, and dropped its backpacks and extra equipment, moving forward without excess weight. The Taliban initially chose not to fight, and the company’s first sweeps were uneventful.
At 8:30 a.m., as one of the squads searched buildings, a gunshot sounded just behind the walls. The Marines rushed toward the door, guns level to their eyes, ready for their first fight. A shout carried over the wall. “Dog!” the voice said. A Marine had fired a warning shot at an attacking dog, scaring it off. The young Marines shook their heads.
Minutes later, gunfire erupted to the south, where another unit, 1st Battalion, 6th Marines, had also inserted Marines in the night. The firing was intense for about 10 minutes, then it subsided. It rose again a few minutes later, and subsided again. Much of the shooting carried the distinct sound of U.S. machine guns and squad automatic weapons. Then a large explosion rumbled near the source of the noise. A small mushroom-shaped cloud rose from the spot: an airstrike.
The Marines listened to the fighting far away. They still had no contact. Before the assault, Capt. Joshua P. Biggers, Company K’s commander, had said that as many as 90 per cent of the company’s Marines had not been in combat before. A few were brand-new — straight from boot camp and infantry school, men with roughly a half-year in the corps. But the captain also said that the bulk of the company had been together a year or more. These Marines knew each other well, he said, and had trained intensely for this day. “They’re ready,” he said.
Soon they were finding signs of the Taliban. A sweep of one compound turned up 12 sacks of fertilizer used to make explosives and a batch of new cooking pots, which insurgents have often used as the shells of bombs.
The compound’s only adult male resident, Abdul Ghani, said the fertilizer belonged to his son. The company detained Abdul Ghani. At 10 a.m., the day changed. Taliban fighters probed the 2nd Platoon, and a firefight erupted as the platoon moved toward the road. It subsided, but not before several Taliban fighters had been killed and the platoon had been fired on by small arms and rocket-propelled grenades.
At 12:40, fighting broke out for 3rd Platoon. For almost three hours, 2nd and 3rd Platoons took sporadic fire from insurgents in several directions. At times, the fighting was intense and the gunfire rose and roared and snapped overhead. The fight briefly quieted after a B-1 bomber dropped a 500-pound bomb on a compound near the landing zone, levelling most of the house there. For a short while after the airstrike, the village was quiet. But by late afternoon, the company, which had established a crude outpost in a compound, was taking fire again. Between exchanges of fire, a squad-size patrol led by Cpl. Thomas D. Drake pushed out across the fields to search the building that had been hit by the airstrike.
The Taliban let the Marines walk into an open field and approach a tall stand of dried grass. Then it opened fire in a hasty ambush. The Marines dropped. They fired back, exposed. Gunfire rose to a crescendo. Cpl. Drake shouted over the noise to the team in front, “You got everyone?” He shouted to the team behind him, which was pressed flat in the field. “Everyone OK?”
The Taliban firing subsided. “We’re moving!” the corporal shouted. The patrol stood and sprinted toward the withdrawing Taliban, and ran across irrigation dikes and poppy fields to enter the compound that had been struck. It searched the wreckage, took pictures, collected a few documents and returned to the small outpost just ahead of dark.
At night, Capt. Biggers reflected on the day. An explosives ordnance disposal team with the company had destroyed four large bombs hidden in the roads. The platoons had seized their first objectives. In its first day of combat, Company K had been fighting for hours without a casualty, and several Taliban fighters were lying dead in one of the fields. — © 2010 The New York Times News Service
84 ) Helping war veterans cope
James Dao
The act of killing is as fundamental to war as oxygen is to fire. Yet it is also the one thing many combat veterans avoid discussing when they return home, whether out of shame, guilt or a deep fear of being misunderstood. But a new study of Iraq war veterans by researchers in San Francisco suggests that more discussion of killing may help veterans cope with an array of mental health problems stemming from war.
The study, published last week in The Journal of Traumatic Stress, found that soldiers who reported having killed in combat, or who gave orders that led to killing, were more likely to report the symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, alcohol abuse, anger and relationship problems.
The study was based on data from health assessments conducted on about 2,800 soldiers who returned from Iraq in 2005 and 2006.
Shira Maguen, a psychologist at the San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center and the principal investigator on the study, said the results suggested that mental health professionals need to incorporate discussions of killing more explicitly into their assessments and treatment plans for veterans. That would include finding ways to discuss the impact of killing, in public forums and in private treatment, to reduce the stigma and shame, she argued.
Mental health experts said the new study confirmed findings from research on Vietnam veterans and did not break much new ground. But they said it underscored that treating stress disorder among veterans is often very different from treating it in people who, say, have been raped or have been in car accidents.
“People don’t understand the moral ambiguity of combat and why it is so hard to get over it,” said Rachel Yehuda, a professor of psychiatry at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York. “What makes combat veterans ill is not always about being a victim, but, in some instances, feeling very much both a perpetrator and a victim at the same time.”
Some experts say military law has also complicated therapy by having unclear rules about when a soldier’s conversations with a therapist are protected from legal action. The mere threat that those conversations could be used in war crimes prosecutions discourages many veterans from seeking counselling, they say. — © 2010 The New York Times News Service
For a short while after the airstrike, the village was quiet. But by late afternoon, the company, which had established a crude outpost in a compound, was taking fire again. Between exchanges of fire, a squad-size patrol led by Cpl. Thomas D. Drake pushed out across the fields to search the building that had been hit by the airstrike.
The Taliban let the Marines walk into an open field and approach a tall stand of dried grass. Then it opened fire in a hasty ambush. The Marines dropped. They fired back, exposed. Gunfire rose to a crescendo. Cpl. Drake shouted over the noise to the team in front, “You got everyone?” He shouted to the team behind him, which was pressed flat in the field. “Everyone OK?”
The Taliban firing subsided. “We’re moving!” the corporal shouted. The patrol stood and sprinted toward the withdrawing Taliban, and ran across irrigation dikes and poppy fields to enter the compound that had been struck. It searched the wreckage, took pictures, collected a few documents and returned to the small outpost just ahead of dark.
At night, Capt. Biggers reflected on the day. An explosives ordnance disposal team with the company had destroyed four large bombs hidden in the roads. The platoons had seized their first objectives. In its first day of combat, Company K had been fighting for hours without a casualty, and several Taliban fighters were lying dead in one of the fields. — © 2010 The New York Times News Service
85) The way forward on Telangana
With the Union government announcing the terms of reference and the time frame for the Telangana Committee, the proper course for the Joint Action Committee of political parties that is spearheading the agitation for a separate state would have been to wait for its report, due by December 31, 2010. The five-member Telangana committee headed by the former Supreme Court judge B.N. Srikrishna needs the time and the space for examining this contentious issue in all its aspects . People and parties are divided on the statehood question, and the terms of reference necessarily had to be broad and wide-ranging, accommodating the demands for both a Telangana state and for a united Andhra Pradesh. In any case, including one demand in the terms of reference would have implied dealing with the other and neither could have been considered in isolation. The JAC’s stand against the committee examining the demand for keeping Andhra Pradesh united mirrored that of the Telangana Rashtra Samiti, whose raison d’etre is a separate Telangana. Quite understandably, other parties, including those with high stakes in Telangana, were not willing to unqualifiedly fall in line with the JAC ’s ultimatums. The end-result could well leave the TRS friendless and lonely. Telangana accounts for 119 of the 294 members in the State Assembly, but only 12 of them have quit so far. Of these, 10 are from the TRS. Only one of the 39 Telugu Desam Party MLAs from the region resigned, while others decided to wait for the decision of the Congress MLAs from the region. As for the BJP, for long an unequivocal supporter of a Telangana State, one of its two MLAs from the region quit. An ineffective JAC, far from being able to convince all the legislators, was reduced to setting a deadline for other MLAs to quit.
Carving out smaller States is too important and complex an issue to be taken in the heat of inflamed passions and under the pressure of political agitations. In the absence of a political consensus, and when concerns are raised about the wider implications for the other parts of the State, decisions will have to be made after wide-ranging consultations, and on the basis of a well laid out road map. Those clamouring for a separate Telangana will surely help their own cause by extending full cooperation to the Srikrishna panel, instead of vitiating the atmosphere again by instigating violence or asking elected political representatives to resign. All stakeholders must ensure that the panel succeeds in its rather difficult task of balancing the interests and concerns of different sections and recommending a plan of action towards a solution, as set out in the terms of reference.
86) Investing in archaeology
Another important archaeological puzzle could be solved on February 17 when the results of the DNA tests conducted on the celebrated Tutankhamun mummy will be revealed by the Egyptian government. This should establish the lineage of the short-lived pharaoh and determine his relationship with other mummies, including that of King Amenhotep III. The significance of these tests goes beyond furthering historical knowledge about Egypt’s ancient history. They are yet anoth er convincing demonstration of how science can advance the frontiers of archaeology. It is a timely reminder to the Indian archaeological establishment that it must act purposefully to close the gap with the rest of the world in the application of science to the field. Where archaeology has embraced cutting edge methods, more of the unseen have been sighted, historical records have been set straight, and new directions discovered. If things go as planned for Egypt, robots will soon walk the hidden passageways of the Great Pyramid of King Khufu to reveal their secrets.
But what about the state of archaeology in India? The science branch of the Archaeological Survey of India was established as early as 1917, but it is mostly limited to chemical analysis and conservation. Limited studies in archaeomaterials have been taken up, but important disciplines such as Archaeological Prospection have not gained the attention they warrant. Central as well as State archaeological establishments need to get multidisciplinary and invest substantially in emerging sciences. It was only in 2008, following a ‘first-of-its-kind’ initiative by IIT Kanpur and the University of Allahabad that the ASI signed a Memorandum of Understanding to set up a Centre for Archaeological Sciences and Technologies at IIT Kanpur. This is a good beginning. However, given the large number of unexplored sites, such efforts need to be significantly scaled up and also be available at the State level. Two decades ago, permission was denied to researchers for making test-pits to study the foundation of the 1000-year-old Brihadisvara temple at Thanjavur. It is understandable that such techniques were treated with caution in that age. Today, difficult investigations can be safely undertaken with the help of less invasive methods such as three-dimensional, multi-offset ground-penetrating radar imaging. A well-researched road map for applying advanced S&T to uncovering the past must be the first new step towards closing the gap. It must be taken without wasting any further time.
87) gnoring lessons of Bhopal & Chernobyl
Brahma Chellaney
The government’s nuclear-accident liability bill seeks to burden Indian taxpayers with a huge hidden subsidy by protecting foreign reactor builders from the weight of the financial consequences of severe accidents.
The vaunted civil nuclear deal with the United States came into effect in 2008, with the U.S. Congress attaching a string of conditions to the ratification legislation, the Nuclear Cooperation Approval and Non-Proliferation Enhancement Act (NCANEA). The Indian Parliament was allowed no role to play, not even to examine the deal’s provisions. But having sidelined Parliament on the main deal, the government now wants it to pass a special law to provide foreign companie s with liability protection in case of nuclear accidents. Such a law has been demanded by U.S. firms, which, unlike their state-owned French and Russian competitors, are in the private sector.
It is important to remember that the promises on which the deal was sold to the country have been belied, one by one. For example, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had exulted in 2008 that the deal “marks the end … of the technology-denial regime against India.” Yet, just last month, his Defence Minister conveyed to U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates India’s “concerns regarding denial of export licences for various defence-related requirements of the armed forces” and other “anomalous” technology restrictions.
After the 123 Agreement was clinched, Dr. Singh told Parliament in 2007 that an “important yardstick has been met by the permanent consent for India to reprocess.” But in 2010, India is still negotiating with the U.S. to secure a right to reprocess spent fuel. The U.S., in any event, has no intention of granting India “permanent consent,” with the State Department having notified Congress that the proposed arrangements with India “will provide for withdrawal of reprocessing consent.” The biggest fiction, of course, was to present the deal as the answer to the country’s burgeoning energy needs. Nuclear energy cannot be a reasonable solution for any country because plants take too long to build and cost far too much. The first plant to be set up under the deal is likely to generate electricity, in the rosiest scenario, not before 2016.
In a more-plausible scenario, the timeline may stretch up to 2020, given the three reactor-exporting countries’ record. While the U.S. has built no plant in many years, Russia is still struggling to complete its much-delayed twin reactors in Kudankulam, India. As for France, its two new plants under construction, one in Finland and the other at home, are billions of dollars over budget and years behind schedule.
The bigger question, which New Delhi consistently has shied away from discussing, is about the cost of electricity from foreign-built reactors. India’s heavily-subsidised indigenous nuclear power industry is supplying electricity at between 270 and 290 paise per kilowatt hour from the reactors built since the 1990s. That price is far higher than the cost of electricity from coal-fired plants. But electricity from foreign-built nuclear reactors will be even dearer. That, in effect, will increase the burden of subsidies on the Indian taxpayers, even as the reactor imports lock India into an external-fuel dependency.
To compound matters, the government’s Civil Liability for Nuclear Damages Bill, proposed to be introduced in the upcoming Parliament session, amounts to yet another tier of state subsidy, even if a hidden one. The bill is designed to shield foreign-reactor builders from the weight of the financial consequences of severe accidents. It shifts the primary burden for accident liability from the foreign builders to the Indian state. Although its text has not yet been made public, the bill is said to cap total compensation payable in the event of a severe radioactive release at Rs. 2,250 crore ($483 million), with the liability of the foreign supplier restricted to a trifling Rs. 300 crore ($64.6 million).
That represents an Indian taxpayer subsidy to foreign firms to help slash their cost of doing business in India. Each foreign reactor will carry a price tag of several billion dollars. Given that India has agreed to award contracts specifically to U.S., French and Russian firms, each such foreign supplier is expected to build more than one twin-reactor plant. India indeed has agreed in writing to import at least 10,000 megawatts of nuclear power-generating capacity from the U.S. alone. While each such firm stands to rake in billions of dollars in profit from the Indian market, its accident liability is being capped virtually at a pittance.
The partial core meltdown almost 31 years ago at the Three Mile Island nuclear plant in Pennsylvania didn’t kill anyone, but it led to 14 years of clean-up costing $1 billion. Despite India’s own bitter experience over the Union Carbide gas catastrophe at Bhopal, the government wants the Indian taxpayers to carry the can for foreign reactor builders. Why cap liability on terms financially prejudicial to Indian interests?
Worse still, India — instead of facilitating open market competition — is seeking to protect foreign firms from the market. From procuring land for them for reactor construction to freeing them from the task of producing electricity at marketable rates, India is doing everything to rig the terms of doing business in their favour. By designating nuclear parks for foreign-built reactors, the government has reserved reactor sites exclusively but separately for the U.S., France and Russia. In the same way it has signed billions of dollars worth of arms contracts in recent years with the U.S. without any competitive bidding and transparency, New Delhi is set to award nuclear contracts on a government-to-government basis.
India’s nuclear-accident liability bill aims to help replicate what U.S. nuclear firms presently enjoy in their domestic market, where the Price-Anderson Act caps the industry’s liability for a severe radioactive release. But for each accident, the Price-Anderson liability system provides more than $10.5 billion in total potential compensation through a complex formula that includes insurance coverage carried by the reactor that suffered the accident, “retrospective premiums” from each of the covered reactors in operation in the U.S., and a 5 per cent surcharge. Washington assumes liability for any catastrophic damages from an accident only above the $10.5 billion figure (which is inflation-adjusted every five years and thus variable).
Why should a poor country like India assume liability from a ridiculously low threshold? In fact, to cover claims of personal injury and property damage in the event of a catastrophic nuclear accident, India — given the density of its population and the consequent higher risks — must also maintain a large standby compensation pool, but without the state being burdened.
Another troubling aspect of the proposed Indian legislation is that while the Price-Anderson Act permits economic (but not legal) channelling of liability, thereby allowing lawsuits against any party, New Delhi is granting foreign suppliers immunity from legal actions — however culpable they may be for an accident — by introducing legal channelling of all liability to the Indian state (which will run the foreign-built plants through its Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited). What will it do to nuclear safety to free foreign suppliers upfront from “the precautionary principle” and “the polluter pays principle” and turn their legal liability for an accident into mere compensation, that too at an inconsequential level?
To be sure, without a cap on liability damages in India, U.S. firms would be exposed to unlimited liability. But in its effort to help create a congenial environment for them to do business in India, should the state gratuitously assume the principal financial burden in the event of an accident? The proposed Indian cap is well below international levels. Japan, for example, has boosted its plant operator liability to120 billion yen ($1.33 billion). Under the OECD’s 2004-amended Paris Convention, total liability was set at €1.5 billion ($2.04 billion), with the operator’s share being nearly half. Germany, for its part, has unlimited operator liability and demands € 2.5 billion ($3.4 billion) security from each plant’s operator.
After the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, with its transboundary consequences, international efforts were initiated to harmonise rules on liability and compensation. But those efforts have been stymied by the failure to bring all relevant international instruments into force. States with a majority of the world’s present 436 nuclear power reactors are not yet party to any international liability convention. Many countries still maintain a “wait and see” approach. For example, China, Japan and the U.S. are not party to any international liability convention, while Russia — a party to the Vienna Convention since 2005 — has refused to pass legislation to waive or cap accident liability for its foreign suppliers. China has yet to erect a formal domestic liability regime, although its State Council in 1986 issued an administrative legal document as an “interim” liability measure.
When a number of nuclear-generating countries are yet to adopt domestic legislation in this field, let alone ratify international conventions, why is New Delhi in a rush to pass a bill that caps liability on terms weighted in favour of foreign suppliers? Parliament indeed should seize the opportunity offered by the liability bill to scrutinise the nuclear deal in its entirety.
88) The recently-held State Labour Ministers’ Conference in New Delhi shows that our governments have manifestly failed in meeting the obligations to end job insecurity, exploitation and poverty, especially of the unorganised labourers. They have been unsuccessful in implementing the basics of social security schemes, including skill building, at both state and national levels. Despite expressions of concern and statements of good intent in the previous Indian Labour and State Conferences, there have been no concrete actions. Violations of labour rights, unjust and unfair conditions of employment, and suppression of trade unions are treated as ‘inevitable’ ills that can continue as an unfortunate reality of life. These are not a result of lack of resources. Rather, lack of priorities, omissions, negligence and discrimination by governments and other players are letting labourers down and out, more so in these times of economic recession.
For unorganised workers
One of the agendas placed in the Central and State Labour Ministers’ Conference concerned the Unorganised Workers’ Social Security Act. The conference also reflected on contract and construction workers, skill development and employment, ESIC schemes and child labourers. According to a survey conducted by the National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) in 2004-05, the total employment in both the organised and the unorganised sectors in the country was 45.9 crore, of which 2.6 crore was in the organised sector and 43.3 crore (about 94 per cent) in the unorganised sector. There has been a huge deficit in the coverage of the unorganised sector workers, in matters of labour protection and social security. After a long, time-taking process, the Unorganised Workers’ Social Security Act came into force in May 2009. The act provides for the definition and the registration of unorganised, self-employed and wage workers. It also offers the formulation of different social security schemes by Central and State governments, the constitution of a National Social Security Board at Central and State levels, and the setting up of workers’ facilitation centres. Social security schemes have been mentioned in the areas of life and disability cover, health and maternity benefits, old age protection, provident fund, employment injury benefits, housing, educational schemes for children, skill upgradation, funeral assistance, and old age homes.
The Labour Conference however brings out the fact that except for the constitution of the National Social Security Board, nothing has moved as yet. No social security scheme has actually been determined on the ground. Instead, the board has constituted a sub-committee to suggest various schemes. There has been no initiative on the registration of unorganised workers. Under the Act, State governments are required to frame State Rules, constitute a State Social Security Board and register the workers. However, there is not much to report at the State level. The conference thus spoke in a diffused way: “The Hon’ble Labour Minister has also written to the State Labour Ministers in this regard. A copy of the Unorganised Workers’ Social Security Act, 2008 and Rules framed under there has been sent to the State Governments.’
It is in the area of contract labourers particularly that the apathy of government is glaringly visible. While no precise estimate of the number of contract workers in the country is available, they constitute a substantial segment of the 132.68 million casual workforce component (according to the 61st Round of the NSSO, corresponding to 2004-05), other constituents being various flexible labour categories like casual (hired for fixed hours, mostly on piece rates), temporary (employed for fixed term), badli (employed in textile mills as substitutes for regular workers), apprentices, etc. The Indian Labour Conference constituted a Task Force some time ago to examine the provisions of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, and to suggest amendments in it for the protection of workers. However, despite six meetings in this regard, no consensus could be arrived at, as there were divergences of views.
The report of the Task Force does recognise the problems, but has not provided any clue for finding solutions to them. Our governments have now resigned to a situation of wide and increasing prevalence of contract labourers in the organised and the unorganised sectors: ‘It was becoming increasingly evident that in view of the changing global economic environment, contract labour had come to stay.’
The Union Minister of Labour and Employment Mallikarjun Kharge, and the Minister of State Harish Rawat, both had to mention the inevitability of contract labourers in their speeches, at a forum which is primarily meant for the defence and expansion of labour rights.
‘Skill building’ has emerged as a new thrust area for organised and unorganised workers, to adapt to changing technologies and labour market demands. As per the NSSO’s 61st Round Survey Report, every year 12.8 million people are added to the labour force. However, the current capacity of the skill development programme is about 3.1 million, including all agencies involved in vocational training activities. As per the last National Sample Survey, only two per cent of the Indian labour force has received vocational training through formal sources and eight per cent through informal sources. Whereas, the percentage in industrialised countries is much higher, varying between 60 per cent and 96 per cent. The Eleventh Five-Year Plan and the National Policy on Skill Development recognise the unprecedented challenge faced by India, for skilling or up-skilling 500 million people by 2022. These initiatives have a broad new strategy to modernise/upgrade all public institutes according to the industrial requirement, set up a large number of new institutes in public, private and public-private partnerships, involve the industry closely in the running of skill development programmes, introduce long-term and short-term modular courses to cover all sectors of the economy, fill up existing vacancies of principals and instructors, use information and communication technology tools to upscale skill development efforts, and to modernise employment exchanges.
However, most of these strategies are falling flat in their implementation. Take, for example, the plan for modernisation/upgradation of the existing ITIs. Union Finance Minister in his Budget Speech 2004-05 had announced various measures for the upgradation of 500 ITIs in the country. Subsequently, this was reduced to 100 ITIs. Finally, the scheme was terminated in March 2009. The States utilised only 40 per cent of the money allotted to this scheme. Or let us look at the urgent need to modernise employment exchanges. They have not changed at all in terms of providing quality guidance on talent assessment, employment counselling, vocational guidance and training-related information to the jobseekers, or in imparting timely and reliable labour market information. There are a large numbers of vacancies in these employment exchanges since years. Their interaction and networking with the industry is dismal, and their success rate in getting employment is still less than 10 per cent.
By forming the Indian Labour Conference, the State Labour Ministers’ Conference and the Standing Labour Committees, the country recognised that the workers in the organised and the unorganised sectors can only achieve the right to work and the rights at work, along with the right to organise and agitate, if positive conditions are created together by the State and the employers. Despite this commitment, the persistent denial of labour rights has raised concerns about the relevance and effectiveness of such bodies. The acceptance, scepticism and then denial shown at these labour bodies make the situation worse. This will not do, as labour rights are clearly defined, and it is often possible to identify a violation, a violator and a remedy. The work done by trade unions and labour support groups over the past decades has shown some positive ways. Deliberations, debates and consensus making can no longer suffice as excuses for failure to take action, especially at a time when labour violations are widespread. Labour rights are not just aspirations. They are not just goals that can be deferred to the future. These rights are based on laws, enforceable by government bodies, tribunals and courts. They demand immediate respect and implementation.
89) The debate sparked by Gita Sahgal’s dispute with Amnesty International over its controversial alliance with a far-right Islamist pressure group goes to the heart of the all-too-familiar conflict that arises when an organisation struggles (and is seen to fail) to reconcile its stated principles with its tactics.
The row erupted when Ms Sahgal, a leading rights activist and until last week head of Amnesty’s gender unit, was suspended for saying that its active collaboration with a former Guantanamo Bay prisoner Moazzam Begg — dubbed Britain’s “most famous supporter of the Taliban” — risked undermining its integrity and secular image.
Whether it is legitimate for a political party or a campaign group to bend its core values in search of ever more allies in a common cause has always been a contentious issue — and a source of much tension between those who fiercely oppose any compromise with their deeply-held principles and their more free-wheeling (and supposedly pragmatic) peers who argue that sometime it is more important to focus on the cause, even if it means hobnobbing with ideologically unsavoury characters.
On the face of it, it should be a no-brainer that principles are sacrosanct but it is not always easy to strike a neat balance between principles and an effective practical strategy. It is a dilemma that secular parties in India, for example, have faced more than once when picking allies against the “bigger enemy” of the day. Post-emergency, they chose some rather strange bedfellows to defeat the Congress. Yet, in 2004 — prompted by the political situation at the time — they flipped everything 180 degrees and embraced the Congress to throw out the BJP which, by then, had come to represent a bigger threat.
In Britain, the Left drew a great deal of criticism for joining hands with an assortment of fundamentalist Muslim groups to oppose the Iraq invasion. Indeed, a significantly large number of the one-million protesters who marched through London in February 2003 under a broad anti-war coalition was mobilised by Muslim organisations, some of very dubious credentials.
The Amnesty row, therefore, is essentially a replay of the same debate; and curiously both then and now the mainstream Left/liberal commentators have remained mostly silent inviting charge of political correctness. Critics see their silence as a “betrayal” of liberal values.
Mr. Begg, who spent three years in Guantanamo Bay after being picked up in Afghanistan in the great post-9/11 American swoop of suspected Al Qaeda/Taliban supporters, was a beneficiary of Amnesty’s persistent campaign against illegal detention and torture of suspected terrorists. When, upon his release in 2005, he formed a group called Cageprisoners to highlight the plight of Guantanamo detainees Amnesty threw its full weight behind him. Soon Mr. Begg became Amnesty’s poster-boy in its anti-torture campaign — and that’s when the backlash started.
It is Mr. Begg’s back-story and his links with radical Islamists that — his critics argue — make him an undesirable ally for an organisation like Amnesty.
A visit to Afghanistan in 1993 to attend a training camp made such a deep impact on him (in his autobiography he describes it as a “life-changing experience”) that in 2001 he moved there with his family to live under Taliban rule. He wrote that the Taliban had made “some modest progress — in social justice and upholding pure, old Islamic values forgotten in many Islamic countries.”
And this after — as The Times’ commentator David Aaronovitch noted — was “about two months after the blowing up of the Bamiyan Buddhas, two years after the televised execution of a woman in the football stadium in Kabul, and in the full knowledge that Taliban police were beating women for improper dress, had fired all women in public service…and had more or less abolished education for women.”
Mr. Begg says that it was his perception of the Taliban at the time and since then he has criticised their human rights abuses. But what about Cageprisoners’ leanings towards people like Anwar-al Awlaki, an extremist Yemeni preacher who is said to have “inspired” a number of alleged terrorists; and its links with Hizb-ut-Tahrir, a virulent jihadi group which is banned in many Muslim countries and has only narrowly escaped a ban in Britain?
Ms Sahgal is not the only dissenting voice in Amnesty. In an internal memo leaked to The Sunday Times, another senior official — Sam Zarifi, Amnesty’s Asia Pacific director — has voiced his disquiet saying that the organisation has not done enough to distinguish its defence of the rights of terror suspects from their extremist views. More Amnesty insiders are expected to come forward in coming weeks as the controversy grows.
Amnesty, of course, insists that its collaboration with Mr Begg is confined to his prisoners’ campaign and that this does not mean that it condones his views on other issues.
“Any suggestion that Amnesty International’s work with Moazzam Begg or Cageprisoners has weakened our condemnation of abuses by the Taliban or other similarly-minded groups does not withstand scrutiny,” it said.
Come on, Amnesty, surely there is such a thing as being guilty by association.
90) Japan remains world’s second-largest economy
Justin McCurry
Japan held on to its status as the world’s second biggest economy as better-than-expected GDP data raised hopes of a sustained recovery from its deepest recession since the war. GDP grew at 1.1 per cent between September and December, which corresponds to a yearly rate of 4.6 per cent, the government said.
The growth proved enough to stave off a challenge from China, due largely to government measures to stimulate Japanese spending on fuel-efficient cars and ‘green” consumer goods. But the growth data was tempered by continued anxiety over falling consumer prices and weak demand. The GDP deflator, the broadest measure of prices, fell 3 per cent from a year earlier, its biggest drop since records began in 1955.
The government, meanwhile, faces the tricky task of reining in huge public debt and honouring spending commitments in its record ¥92trn budget plans.
In a sign of the impact of massive stimulus packages introduced last year, domestic demand helped boost GDP for the first time in seven quarters. Consumer spending, which accounts for about 60 per cent of the economy, rose 0.7 per cent from the previous quarter. The figures also pointed to growing confidence among firms, with corporate investment in plants and equipment rising by 1 per cent, its first increase since the first quarter of 2008. — © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
Corrections and clarifications
The fourth paragraph of an article “A judge extraordinaire” (Op-Ed, February 13, 2010) was “When the Delhi High Court limited Section 377 ....” Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (which criminalises unnatural sex) would have been right.
Mamata Banerjee (Union Minister of Railways) was misspelt as Mamta Banerjee in the caption of a photograph that went with a report “Railway land for IIT hospital project” (February 14, 2010).
It is the policy of The Hindu to correct significant errors as soon as possible. Please specify the edition (place of publication), date and page.
The Readers’ Editor’s office can be contacted by
Telephone: +91-44-28418297/28576300 (11 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday to Friday);
Fax: +91-44-28552963;
E-mail: readerseditor@thehindu.co.in
Mail: Readers’ Editor, The Hindu, Kasturi Buildings,
859 & 860 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002, India.
All communication must carry the full postal address and telephone number.
No personal visits.
The Terms of Reference for the Readers’ Editor are on www.thehindu.com
91) The challenge from Pune
Towards the close of 2009 which ended without a major terror attack, Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram said in a speech to the intelligence community that “there is the danger of a terror-free year inducing complacency, signs of which can be seen everywhere.” Last weekend, when a terrorist bomb ripped through the popular Germany Bakery in Pune, Mr. Chidambaram’s warning was underlined in stark relief. Ever since last summer, India’s intelligence se rvices had been warning of a renewed offensive by Pakistan-based jihadist groups like the Lashkar-e-Taiba. Police in several States, as well as neighbouring Bangladesh, had foiled multiple jihadist attack plans. In August, Indian communication intelligence detected plans to stage a car-bomb attack in Pune, while the interrogation of Pakistani-American jihadist David Headley made clear that the Lashkar had ambitious plans to stage large-scale attacks across India. Earlier this month, top Lashkar ideologue Abdur Rehman Makki had even held out explicit threats to target New Delhi, Kanpur, and Pune. But even though India’s police and intelligence services knew that Pune, apart from other cities, was facing a threat, they were unable to learn just when terrorists might strike and where.
If Saturday’s bombing does turn out to be the handiwork of Pakistan-based jihadist groups, Indian policymakers could soon find themselves confronting a difficult dilemma. Many in New Delhi’s policy community believe renewed operations by jihadist groups are the outcome of the desire of powerful elements in Pakistan’s military-dominated elite to maintain an adversarial relationship with India. This, the argument goes, is because tensions with India give Pakistan’s military an excuse to go slow in its ongoing offensive against Islamist groups at home — a war many in Pakistan believe has been foisted on the country by the United States. Encouraging jihadists to target India allows Pakistan’s army to rebuild its long-standing relationship with the religious right, and to maintain its political primacy at home. If this turns out to be the case, it will bring India’s renewed efforts at dialogue with Pakistan under enormous pressure. Neither calling off the dialogue nor engaging in it will protect India from attack — dialogue, after all, is only a process, not an outcome in itself. Pakistan’s half-measures against the perpetrators of the Mumbai attacks, as well as its refusal to dismantle the military infrastructure of the groups, illustrate the need to acquire the means to deal with a Pakistani establishment that seems to think it has nothing to gain from acting against anti-India terrorists. It is a situation that calls for a mature response that is firm and result-oriented and not one stemming from passions of the moment.
92) Yanukovych is back
Opposition leader Viktor Yanukovych has clearly won, by a 3.48 percentage margin, Ukraine’s presidential election held recently. In keeping with the growing fashion, his antagonist, Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, has indicated that she will mount a court challenge to the outcome. International observers have testified that the election was transparent and unbiased, and was an “impressive display” of democracy. The European Union and the United States ha ve endorsed the outcome. This contest has been a far cry from 2004, when electoral fraud and the annulment of Mr. Yanukovych’s ‘victory’ ushered in what came to be known as the ‘Orange Revolution’. Mr. Yanukovych has called on Ms Tymoshenko to resign her job as Prime Minister but if she proves defiant, he will have to decide between going for fresh parliamentary elections and doing business with Ms Tymoshenko for a while.
But what explains this political reversal in this strategically located east European nation? Virtually everyone concedes that the architects of the ‘Orange Revolution’ cynically betrayed the grand promises they made during that heady process. Outgoing President Viktor Yushchenko and the Prime Minister have been feuding incessantly. The economy has been thoroughly mismanaged. The russophobic and pro-NATO policies and postures of Mr. Yushchenko have been ill received by the people, 33 per cent of whom have Russian as their mother tongue. A Pravda commentary captures the essence of what happened: “The Ukrainians did not want to join NATO, the Ukrainians did not want to be colonised by the European Union. They want jobs, they want schools, they want hospitals, they want to eat.” Domestically, the influence of oligarchs is a threat to democracy and Ms Tymoshenko herself is alleged to have amassed enormous wealth in the energy sector in the 1990s. Internationally, Kiev’s relations with Moscow have been recklessly mishandled. The President-elect, who has a strong support base in the largely ethnic-Russian East and South, says he will improve Ukrainian-Russian relations and lift restrictions on the use of Russian in schools and the media. Ukraine will not join NATO, and Russia’s Black Sea fleet will continue to be based at the Crimean port of Sevastopol. If Mr. Yanukovych pays attention to the basic problems of the people, works for clean governance, and establishes a new equilibrium in external relations, he can expect to lead his nation to a period of political stability and prosperity.
93) The need to give dialogue a chance
Sherry Rehman
Giving dialogue a chance is critical for taking Pakistan and India out of a bilateral cold war time-warp.
Resuming dialogue is always weighed down by anxiety over the outcome. But India and Pakistan need not worry. Nobody realistically expects too much out of tentative renewals. They hold little promise of anything except an exchange of chai and samosas. Yet these renewals are bright arcs in the treacherous sky that hangs over the nuclear neighbours. The mere return to dialogue signals a recognition by both parties that a ritual has its uses. It breaks the i ce, presages hope, promises substance, and sets the stage for road maps and change.
For those who want to teach the other state a lesson or negotiate a more nationalist identity by spurning dialogue, there is comfort in the sulphur of emotion. They are yet to understand that national security, or its pursuit, through non-coercive diplomacy is a ruthless business. It bets on the long term and looks at maximising optimal outcomes. If a military solution is the best option, then all resources such as anger, ballistic missiles, artillery and the best planners need to be marshalled on the table. If a military outcome is not in the best interest of either side, then it is chai, samosas and gritted charm.
At a recent track-two dialogue between experienced interlocutors of Indo-Pakistan strategic nodes in Bangkok, one thing was clear: despite the Indian Premier League issue that sent alarm bells ringing across Pakistan when its cricketers were excluded from the bids, civil society in India still seeks to do business with Pakistan. This was a very important signal for those of us who have invested in cross-border meetings and relationships as a way of broadening the peace constituency. The backlash against the Shiv Sena that the Shah Rukh Khan episode generated also demonstrated that support for peace in South Asia is not just a wishy-washy Leftist dream.
Sustainable peace is a not a prelude to concessions by either state. But it should signal the willingness for flexibility on key issues. New Delhi will serve the region better if it shelves the threat of suspending dialogue every time there is a terrorist strike. The good news is that templates exist for many of the smaller conflicts in the Indo-Pakistan terrain. It is Kashmir and terrorism that loom large on the road map, while the conflict in Afghanistan also provokes responses that muddy the pool. Water in South Asia is a contentious issue and, if left unresolved, could spark conflict between riparian states of the Indus Water system. Where do we stand on all of the above?
On terrorism, Pakistan is facing a blitz. It is a capacity deficit, not a commitment lag. The question that needs addressing is a vexing one for New Delhi. How much power does it want to concede to terrorists? Democratic governments may be weak everywhere, perhaps more so in Pakistan, but they hedge their futures against war. They seek opportunities for peace and trade, not because they are nice but because they are accountable for losses. War with India is really not an option when more people die in Pakistan from acts of terror than in war-torn Iraq or, for that matter, anywhere in the world. New Delhi should, therefore, grasp the magnitude of the war roiling Pakistan before it makes dialogue hostage to the terror that rips through the region. This is not to say composite dialogue is some metric for success. Far from it.
In fact, in the last lap, it looked like an instrument that would lose all shine if not shot in the arm with some political will. After the fourth round of composite dialogue sorted out the fine print on many well-worn CBMs, the inertia of leaden intentions dragged movement at its usual pace. Then Mumbai, or 26/11, happened. Suddenly, the state became hostage to terrorists and their goals. The dialogue screeched to a halt, and the power of setting the agenda landed in the terrorists’ laps. This is what has to change for all countries of the region to combat terrorism together. We must seek to marginalise those who promote the terrorist cause.
The identity of most terrorists seeking to rob Pakistan’s citizens of their peace may not be trans-national at a glance but the sophisticated military resources and funds that drive them do not originate in Pakistan. In the last two years alone, over 5,000 people have lost their lives to terrorism. Our children are afraid of going to school and our hospitals are bomb-sites. This is a war Pakistan expects its neighbours to help it with and, try as it may, Islamabad cannot possibly provide a guarantee against bombs in India if it cannot guarantee such a thing in its Military’s General Headquarters.
On this count, dialogue should lead to the construction of joint mechanisms for intelligence-sharing, best practices and optimal outcomes. Intelligence is the first line of defence in terrorist terrain, and we need to bolster our states with a formal architecture for interaction between India and Pakistan. Terrorism cannot be tackled alone, and while both states have skeletons in their unofficial closets, these and other mutual embarrassments should be discussed across the table, not on the airwaves, making our media combatants in a virtual war. Interrupting dialogue will only reify hardened positions, not create room for cooling off.
Second, structured talks on Kashmir will have to resurface, even if they inch forward. If New Delhi refuses to include Kashmir at a later stage on the formal table, the dialogue will lose momentum and political traction in Pakistan. Peace-making governments will increasingly become hostage to shrill nationalist voices and the project of Pax South Asia will again flounder on the rocks of gratuitous intransigence. Talks on Kashmir will also profit from a back channel, as well as the quiet inclusion of Kashmiri opinion in any dialogue for it to remain credible. Representation from Kashmir on both sides of the border is essential if the process is not to be seen as an exercise at appropriating real estate.
On Afghanistan, Pakistan is only one of the smaller elephants in the room. Islamabad’s fear of Indian encirclement will lighten if international strategies to build a nation out of that failing state succeed. Troop surges will likely tip the scales in the short run for the U.S.-NATO forces to negotiate with the Taliban but are unlikely to square the stability and governance circle on its own. International support for a broad-based ethnic mix in Afghanistan will be the only way forward if the region is not to lapse into a lawless buffer zone for extremists to build an infrastructure of dominance and pseudo-Shariah to terrorise the region with. Islamabad’s cavil about Baloch insurgents finding sanctuary in Indian consulates can be resolved if New Delhi provides transparency. Indian protests about Pakistan sponsoring terrorist attacks on its embassy can be rationally resolved through mutual exchange and dialogue.
Four, the widespread anxiety in Pakistan over Indian dams on rivers that deplete the Indus downstream can actually be discussed in a permanent dialogue mechanism that can be established between the two countries, without prejudice to the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT). The IWT has stood the test of time. But in case of violations, it depends ultimately on arbitration, which is not always to the satisfaction of either party, as was the case in Baglihar. Pakistan is dangerously water-stressed and its depleting rivers and reservoirs can benefit only from a joint working commission with India. There is scant awareness in India of Pakistan’s concerns over the potential damming of the Chenab. This is one conflict that can snowball as water is not always a renewable resource in South Asia. Urgent planning is needed by both countries for conservation that is both sustainable and mutually acceptable.
Shifting a state’s strategic calculus in a conflict is always a challenge. Giving dialogue a chance is critical for taking Pakistan and India out of a bilateral cold war time-warp. While the rest of the world forges ahead, meeting in Paris to re-think global nuclear stockpiles, South Asia’s two dinosaurs remain wedded to regimes that are based on mutual opacity, while their conventional arms race remains unfettered by nuclear deterrence. Giving China a role in a separate trilateral commission for nuclear and other talks can help ease that neuralgia.
India’s military focus is still Pakistan, in terms of brigades and hardware. That forces the military in Pakistan to keep the troop strength balanced when all resources are needed on another, dispersed battlefield. Here, history for once, can show the way. In the 1960s, Islamabad withdrew its forces quietly when New Delhi was facing down China in Aksai Chin, as all responsible accounts from Washington will testify. (They should know, as they had asked General Ayub Khan to do that). If one is looking for a game-changer, this will be it. For Pakistan, the potential theatre of conflict will shift where needed, and threat perceptions will slowly start shifting closer to the real ground zero at home. The trust deficit will move down multiple notches and a structured, monitored dialogue can cash in on the space afforded by such a seminal act of courage and statesmanship.
The Indian leadership should strengthen its Prime Minister’s hand to fashion such a grand strategic bargain for South Asia. For, without one, dialogue will go round and round in vilified circles, becoming a low-intensity space for conflict prevention. We need to go beyond crisis management. We need to shift into conflict resolution and business momentum mode. But for all that to happen, we need to give dialogue a chance.
(Sherry Rehman is former Minister of Information and Broadcasting and Member, National Assembly, Pakistan.)
94 This is not the easy story line about the man who was imprisoned under apartheid for 27 years, yet became president of South Africa without an embittered heart.
Nor is it the story in which the media are comparing his legacy to the current commotion under President Jacob Zuma, whether it be HIV or the disparity and crime in the townships. Having been to South Africa twice in the last eight months, there is much degradation to be seen. But one must also still remark how amazing that country is, only 16 years out of apartheid. It is hard for the United States to throw stones since it took a full century after ending slavery to establish civil rights laws for African Americans.
Prescience
No, the Mr. Mandela we should be thinking about here in the United States is the one whose prescience remains unanswered by us.
When Mr. Mandela came to Harvard University in 1998 to receive an honorary degree, he said, “The current world financial crisis also starkly reminds us that many of the concepts that guided our sense of how the world and its affairs are best ordered, have suddenly been shown to be wanting.” He noted how economic theorists went “unchallenged in the day-to-day operations of a system that operated in the interests of the powerful.”
We sure learned a lot in the decade since, didn’t we? Not only are we back to hearing about millions in cash and stock bonuses to the heads of taxpayer-bailed-out banks, it appears that someone got to President Obama to tone down his populist outrage.
As the Democratic nominee for president in 2008, Mr. Obama said, “It would be unacceptable for executives of these institutions to earn a windfall at a time when the U.S. Treasury has taken unprecedented steps to rescue these companies with taxpayer resources.” Just last month, he was using “fat cat” rhetoric to criticise a system “that makes a few people obscene amounts of money but doesn’t add value to the economy.”
But this week, Mr. Obama told Bloomberg Business Week that he does not “begrudge” the $9 million in stock bonuses to Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein and the $17 million bonus to JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon. Obama said the bonuses indeed represented an “extraordinary amount of money” to the average person but then brushed it off by adding “there are some baseball players who are making more than that and don’t get to the World Series either, so I’m shocked by that as well ... I know both those guys; they are very savvy businessmen.”
Mr. Obama needs to review the part of Mr. Mandela’s Harvard speech that said the world financial crisis calls for a “fundamental rethinking and reconceptualisation.” The rest of us can revisit the part of the speech where Mr. Mandela said, “The greatest single challenge facing our globalised world is to combat and eradicate its disparities ... we constantly need to remind ourselves that the freedoms which democracy brings will remain empty shells if they are not accompanied by real and tangible improvements in the material lives of the millions of ordinary citizens of those countries.”
Not serious about his dream
We did not learn much from that, either. While the media feasts on the problems of South Africa, which has the second-highest income disparities in the world according to the CIA Factbook, we are not setting much of an example, despite our wealth and even after we put an African American in the White House. The income inequality of the United States is statistically worse than China, Nigeria, and Nicaragua.
It is the 20th anniversary of the freedom of Nelson Mandela. But the evidence remains scant that we are serious about his dream of economic freedom for all. — © 2010 The New York Times News Service
95) China: animal welfare advocates’ voice finally heard
Her apartment in northwest Beijing looks like a small zoo with all its inhabitants: 43 cats, five dogs, three rabbits, three pigeons, a duck, an owl, and a monkey. But many of the animals are sick, injured or crippled.
Lu Di, the 79-year-old apartment owner, patiently cleans up the fur, feathers, and excrement that is splattered over the room. She gets up at 5 every morning to feed the animals, clean them, and take the sick ones to the veterinarian.
“It normally takes a whole day to finish my routine,” says Lu, head of the China Small Animal Protection Association (CSAPA) and a renowned advocate for animal welfare. The thin, hunched grey-haired lady was once a secretary to the late Chairman Mao Zedong on account of her expert knowledge of classical Chinese literature.
Born and raised in an intellectual family, Lu was 44 when in 1975, the 82-year-old Mao Zedong’s eyesight began to fail due to cataracts. Mao loved to read, especially classical Chinese literature and history. But the cataracts obstructed his vision and prevented his enjoyment of reading. Mao had a confidential secretary to read aloud Party documents, but that secretary found classical Chinese literature difficult to handle. Mao needed someone with a solid background in classical literature able to interact with him for this job.
A number of candidates were selected from Peking University’s Chinese literature department. From that group, Mao picked Lu, a teacher in the department.
Mao had read a selection of classical Chinese writings entitled “Anthology of Past Dynasties”, in which some of the articles were annotated by Lu. Impressed by Lu’s talent, Mao remembered her name. Lu’s four-month experience reading aloud to Mao and discussing classical Chinese writings with him won her nationwide fame.
She describes herself in the past as an elegant woman, who “often sat in a clean office, drinking tea and reading books.” Although she wants to write about Mao and classic Chinese literature, caring for the animals leaves her little time and energy.
“She could have lived a comfortable life like other old people,” says Zhong Liqin, a CSAPA staff member. “However, she has chosen a difficult one. “ Lu says she developed her emotional bond with small animals when she was a little girl — “I had ducks, cats, and dogs as pets at home.” As a middle-aged woman during the Cultural Revolution, she started saving injured animals.
“The political chaos left many families broken, and children’s pets homeless or abused,” she recalls. “I felt like I had to save them. All lives are equal, and we all live only once.” “I’ve seen too much cruelty to ignore the barbarian and uncivilized side of China. It became my mission to save abused animals and to awaken people’s conscience so they treat animals properly.” In 1992, Lu launched CSAPA, an NGO dedicated to animal welfare and animal rescue. Now China’s largest animal welfare group, CSAPA has an animal shelter in Beijing’s northern Changping District with more than 1,000 animals, mostly dogs and cats, in residence.
But as the number of animals Lu has rescued has grown, so has the anger of her neighbours. The smell of her apartment discourages visitors and annoys neighbours. Many of her workers feared infection and quit.
“It is admirable to care for small lives. But you can’t do that at the cost of other people’s welfare,” says a security guard in the neighbourhood.
CPASA’s Zhong says some neighbours took revenge by smashing Lu’s windows. They also threatened to kill the animals. Lu held talks with her neighbours several times but the problem remained unsolved. While the neighbours want the animals gone, Lu says they have nowhere else to go.
Lu says she has no choice because the animals are either sick or injured and need special attention. “The neighbours don’t understand and the security guards inspect my belongings to prevent me from smuggling animals into the building. I have been accused, humiliated and attacked, but I’m not worried. I’m very strong,” she says.
What does worry her is the cost of running the CSAPA. The 1,000-plus animals consume about 300 kg of pet food every day, costing up to 70,000 yuan a month.
With medical costs and staff pay included, the organisation needs at least 150,000 yuan a month. Lu struggles to get enough money, as member contributions and donations always fall short. She has already sold her furniture and car, and mortgaged her apartment.
Lu lives alone. Her husband died in 2004. Her daughter and son moved to the U.S. in the 1980s. Her son, a programmer at an IT company in America, sends money to Lu every month. He has been doing this since 1990.
“My son sends me $50,000 a year in recent years, and I spend it all on the animals. I don’t dare to tell him that I need much more. I’m his mother and my heart aches for my poor son. But I can’t stop what I have been doing,” she says.
Every time an animal looks into my eyes as if it is begging for help, I have to help. I will keep saving them as long as I’m still breathing.” To Lu, the abandoned animals are as innocent as children. She remembers their names and stories — “Each of them has a sad story.” Lu points to a female dog named Yong Chang. She was pregnant when Lu found her. The dog had only three legs, one of which was skinned up. “That was clear evidence of cruelty. China needs a law to punish those who abuse animals, otherwise the cruelty will never end,” she says.
Cases of animal abuse are not rare in China. In 2006, an online clip showed a woman stomping a cat to death. In 2002, a 22-year-old Tsinghua University student splashed sulphuric acid on bears in Beijing Zoo. Both cases drew public outcry, but the abusers were not punishable under existing Chinese law.— Xinhua
96) Wilderness treks helping troubled teens in U.K.
Louise Tickle
Researchers are evaluating the effect it can have on troubled young people.
“You can’t fight nature,” says Jo Roberts, chief executive of the Wilderness Foundation, U.K..
“So if it’s chucking it down and the wind is howling and you’re tired, and the only way to get relief from that is to get your tent up, you have to dig deep inside yourself and focus.”
Roberts is leading a project that takes small groups of disruptive and emotionally damaged young people to the wildest and most remote parts of the British Isles. The aim is to help them connect at a profound level with nature in the raw, and, in the process, raise their self-esteem.
“Being in a true wilderness means having to work with things you can’t change,” says Roberts. If someone has anger management issues or a history of violence, it’s often rooted, she says, in a deeply felt frustration with the world. But there’s no point in being angry or frustrated with nature. You just have to get on and solve the problems it throws at you — because if you don’t, you can’t shout, punch or even negotiate away the consequences. Plenty of international research is emerging to show that there are health benefits to spending time in the natural environment, says Roberts. Taking this a step further, lots of people believe from long experience - in Roberts’s case, years working in South African townships — that lifting disturbed youth out of destructive home environments in stressful urban settings and putting them in the great outdoors can be a catalyst for transformation.
It’s a theory now being put to the test by Essex University’s sport and exercise science department, whose senior researcher, Dr. Jo Barton, is assessing the foundation’s project, TurnAround.
Launched in 2007, it involves working with small groups of troubled teens for nine months. Roberts was unable to get referrals from Essex county council, but the local youth offending team decided to offer the opportunity to some of their most problematic clients, and nine young people were referred.
The first stage is a fully supported wilderness trail to Scotland, accompanied by a psychologist, outdoor experts and volunteer mentors from the local community. This is followed by monthly group activities and weekly one-to-one sessions. It ends with a five-day sailing trip, during which the young people act as the crew. Barton has accompanied the two cohorts who have so far completed the nine-month programme on their wilderness and sailing experiences, and also meets up with them at the monthly sessions.
“The first thing that hits them is the complete shock of no shops and no houses and no buildings. They find it hard to believe that anywhere can simply have nothing in it,” she says.
The study she’s carrying out requires her to measure each individual’s levels of self-esteem, mood patterns and feelings of connectedness to nature over a three-year period. But couldn’t her ongoing participation in the wilderness activities affect the independence of her research, particularly as it’s obvious what results the foundation would like to see?
First, says Barton, it would actually be impossible to embark on the data-gathering required without the young people getting to know her. “We are dealing with people who’ve had horrendous experiences in their childhoods, and some of the behaviours are quite shocking,” she explains.
“I’m not trying to be their friend, but it’s important that they know I’ll muck in and not just stand around with a clipboard.”
Their respect and trust are crucial, she says, because the questionnaires she administers on a monthly basis, and before and after each expedition, are worth nothing if the young people aren’t willing to be honest.
She is also reliant, she explains, on the quality of the relationship she builds with each young person in order to retain contact with them throughout the three years.
“My own personal view is that these things are excellent for you, but I wouldn’t let that influence my research,” she says.
“We incorporate a selection of standardised, internationally recognised instruments, and then put together a composite questionnaire. I re-emphasise to them that there’s no right or wrong answer and that I simply value their opinion. And with young people, you’ll tend to find that they’re much more honest than adults.”
Barton is measuring variations in self-esteem, mood and feelings of connectedness to nature. Qualitative data is also gathered through a series of semi-structured, open-ended questions.
Given the situations of the young people, particularly those in the first group, who were older, homeless or living in foyers and going cold turkey from drug and alcohol habits, it’s hardly surprising that scores were low on all states being measured before their first wilderness trail. — © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
97) Colombia: why war on drugs may never be won
Rory Carroll
Decades after Richard Nixon tried to end the trafficking of cocaine from Colombia, success seems as elusive as ever.
Up close, erythroxylum coca looks almost pretty — a plant with curving branches, green leaves and small yellow flowers that mature into red berries.
It has been cultivated on the slopes of the Andes since before the Incas, and invested with divine properties. When chewed, its leaves act as a mild stimulant and help overcome hunger, thirst and fatigue.
But these virtues do not alter the fact that having an ideal climate and terrain for coca — the raw ingredient of cocaine — has been a catastrophe for Colombia. The crop has wrought violence, narco-trafficking and corruption.
Divine or otherwise, coca has proved resilient, verging on indestructible, in withstanding the decades-old “war on drugs” declared by Richard Nixon and prosecuted by successive U.S. presidents.
Military helicopters continue to scythe over treetops in the Colombian jungle and hundreds of millions of dollars are still poured into the fight — but there is a growing conviction that it cannot be won.
It may evolve and change shape, move from jungles to cities and from bloody battles to discreet bribes, but it will not end with a flag planted in the ground and victory declared.
Powerful forces
An individual coca bush is fragile, but the forces behind it are powerful and adaptable: peasant farmers who turn the leaves into paste, clandestine laboratories which turn it into powder, guerrillas and armed gangs who traffic it abroad, middlemen and state authorities who launder the revenue. Each link in the chain has a strong incentive.
A peasant in certain remote parts of Colombia has a choice: grow corn, rice, potatoes and vegetables for prices that fluctuate and sometimes barely make it worthwhile, or grow coca, safe in the knowledge of a handsome return. Colombia’s U.S.-backed eradication effort includes satellites and fumigation-spraying aircraft, but growers have adapted with more resistant strains and smaller plots hidden under taller plants.
Government inducements to wean peasants off coca with loans and alternative economic activities have faltered.
“Government policies related to zero coca, and strict verification procedures, take a long time and limit the state’s ability to work with communities in transitioning from a coca economy to a legal economy,” a recent U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) report said.
“When security and coca eradication are not synchronised with the arrival of socio-economic projects, the mood of a community can quickly become hostile.”
A new book, Shooting Up: Counter-insurgency and the War on Drugs, by the respected Brookings Institution scholar Vanda Felbab-Brown, says eradication campaigns in Afghanistan and Colombia have left drug production unaffected but alienated locals, gifting political capital to insurgents.
Plan Colombia, the military-heavy U.S. aid programme, has had significant success in helping the country’s security forces push Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Farc) guerrillas out of cities and deep into the jungle.
A country that once risked collapsing into chaos now has political stability, a growing economy and a popular president, Alvaro Uribe. But Farc and a smaller leftist rebel group, the ELN, have adapted to their restricted theatre of operations and continued trafficking cocaine, which remains their main income source.
In recent months, Farc has made a military comeback, ambushing troops and kidnapping and killing a provincial governor. Analysts think the pendulum could be swinging back their way.
“The Farc seem to be bouncing back,” Leon Valencia, the director of the Nuevo Arco Iris (New Rainbow) thinktank, said. “The decline of the democratic security policy has begun.”
Rightwing paramilitary groups also remain in the game. Originally set up by ranchers in the 1980s to combat leftist guerrillas, the paramilitaries mutated into narco-trafficking private armies.
They controlled swaths of territory and co-opted businesses and politicians until a government scheme from 2005 demobilised 32,000. Many leaders were extradited to the U.S., but many lower-ranking “paras” who failed to find jobs or promised state assistance have returned to what they know best — trafficking drugs.
“According to the government, the [demobilisation] process was successful. However, shortly after the demobilisation process, new successor groups emerged in the entire country that continued the criminal activities,” Jose Miguel Vivanco, the Americas director for Human Rights Watch, said.
A recently-published report by the organisation — Paramilitaries’ Heirs: The New Face of Violence in Colombia — makes grim reading.
The city of Medellin, once the showcase of Colombia’s counter-narcotics fight, illustrates the intractability of the problem. A steep fall in violence paved the way for an apparent urban renaissance, but murder rates rose again last year as drug gangs battled for control.
Prominent local figures, with government backing, are now trying to negotiate a truce. That has raised suspicion of a return to the era of discreet pacts, when officials gave cartels free rein to traffic cocaine in return for social peace.
With victory in the so-called drug war ever more elusive, there are growing calls around the world — from think tanks, law enforcement officials and former presidents — to decriminalise cocaine. Just as the end of prohibition doomed the bootleggers, the logic goes, decriminalisation could put traffickers out of business. It is an experiment no government has yet dared to try. — © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
Corrections and clarifications
The second paragraph of an article “The Finance Minister’s dilemma” (“Run-up to the Budget”, February 12, 2010) was “In a sense, the interim budget 2009-10 — the fifth and last of the United Progressive Alliance government in its first term but Mr. Mukherjee’s first as Finance Minister ....” A reader said that Mr. Mukherjee was in additional charge of finance at the time of presenting the interim Budget for 2009-2010 (from January 2009) but continued as External Affairs Minister till the end of the UPA Government’s first term (from October 24, 2006 to May 23, 2009). The writer clarifies: Mr. Mukherjee has been Finance Minister earlier also and he presented quite a number of Budgets during the tenure of previous Prime Ministers. In the article, the reference was in the context of the UPA Government’s first term in office. It is true that he was the acting Finance Minister when he presented the Interim Budget and it was his first in the UPA regime. However, although acting, the Interim Budget papers referred to him as “Finance Minister”.
“Srikrishna” was misspelt as “Srikrihna” in “Cartoonscape” (Editorial page, February 16, 2010).
It’s Lars Peder Brekk (Norwegian Minister of Agriculture and Food) as said in the caption of the photograph that went with a report “Time running out on climate change: Norwegian Minister” (February 16, 2010). The text had it incorrectly as Lars Pedder Brekk.
A sentence in an item “Bradman lauds Lindwall” (“This Day That Age – From the pages of The Hindu dated February 16, 1960”) was “Sir Donald Bradman said in Adelaide on February 18, that cricket lovers throughout the world would accept the news of Lindwall’s greatness, but they would never do full justice to his sterling qualities, for he was an outstanding example in many ways.” The date should have been February 15. It was an editing error.
The Southern Railway General Manager is Deepak Krishan, and not Deepak Krishna (three instances) as given in the text of a report “[Villupuram-Mayiladuthurai] BG line to be opened for passenger traffic” (Tamil Nadu, February 16, 2010).
It is the policy of The Hindu to correct significant errors as soon as possible. Please specify the edition (place of publication), date and page.
The Readers’ Editor’s office can be contacted by
Telephone: +91-44-28418297 (11 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday to Friday);
Fax: +91-44-28552963;
E-mail: readerseditor@thehindu.co.in
Mail: Readers’ Editor, The Hindu, Kasturi Buildings,
859 & 860 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002, India.
All communication must carry the full postal address and telephone number.
No personal visits.
The Terms of Reference for the Readers’ Editor are on www.thehindu.com
98) The funding gap persists
Union Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee has flagged an area of serious concern while speaking about the development of infrastructure. With just two years left in the current Five-Year Plan, he says that at the present flow of investment it may not be possible to raise the $514 billion required during this period. The Public Private Partnership (PPP) mode has become the preferred option of both the Central and State governments. Though the inflow of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) has shown an upward trend, it does not really help since much of it goes into the capital market. The future of the Indian economy, which is expected to grow at about 7.2 per cent this year, seems tied to the growth of the infrastructure sector. Economists and investment analysts suggest that the tardy progress in infrastructure development could shave off up to two percentage points in the overall growth. To return to a nine per cent growth trajectory, removing infrastructure bottlenecks is critical. A PPP policy has been enunciated, rules have been framed for the collection of toll in the roads sector, and the State governments have also realised that the yawning gap in infrastructure could be bridged only through FDIs and adoption of the PPP. Despite all this, not much seems to be happening on this crucial front.
Of the key sectors coming under the infrastructure umbrella — roads, ports, airports, telecommunication, transport, and power — only the telecom sector has maintained its significant rate of growth, thanks to the sustained initiatives and open competition. After a heady start nearly a decade ago, the programme for the development and upgradation of the National Highways has lost momentum, with just 20 per cent of the target of 50,000 km achieved by mid-2009. A global recession hit the aviation sector hard, slowing down the progress in the development and expansion of airports. The sea ports remain the weakest link in the chain. There has been a renewed interest in the power sector, especially in the non-conventional areas. But even the ultra-mega power projects show very tardy progress. An acute shortage of gas, thanks to the low priority accorded to the energy sector, has further hit power generation, leading to continued power cuts. The governments at the Centre and in the States need to remove the policy constraints and institutional hurdles to investment, implement announced policies, put a credible regulatory mechanism in place for each sector, and come up with a transparent dispute-resolution process. A fair, open, and rational tariff structure needs to be built into all PPP ventures.
99) Reaching out to small investors
The government needs to draw the right lessons from the recently concluded public offer of the National Thermal Power Corporation, which is among the most valuable of government-owned companies. Its follow-on public offer of 412,273,220 equity shares was fully subscribed only because of the sizable support it received from the Life Insurance Corporation of India and the State Bank of India. But, the portion of the share offer reserved for retail investors was grossly undersubscribed. After the NTPC, several other top performing government-owned undertakings — for instance, the Rural Electrification Corporation and the National Mineral Development Corporation — are expected to come up with public offer of shares. By offering a small part of its huge holdings in these undertakings, the government wants to mop up funds by way of capital receipts, thanks to the urgent need for it to bridge the ballooning fiscal deficit. Public enterprises like the NTPC that are already listed have been asked to increase the size of their public float up to 10 per cent of the equity capital. Those that are profitable but have not been listed so far have been asked to do so.
In the NTPC issue, although the fiscal objective has been realised with the full subscription, the meagre retail response means that another important objective, namely wide participation, has not been achieved. Share offers by profitable public enterprises are expected to spread the equity culture, which is now at abysmal levels and skewed in favour of specific regions. Investors who are more safety conscious would provide the government company with a stable, diffused shareholding. The principal reason why a substantial section of retail investors has shunned the NTPC issue is the high floor price — of Rs.201 a share — in relation to the market price of around Rs.205. Investors have evidently preferred to wait and pick up the shares without having to go through the issue process. It is true that market conditions turned adverse on the day the issue opened but any deft management of public issue should take into account all the contingencies. A suggestion has been made that retail investors should be given incentives, preferably a relatively large discount in the floor price. A wide range of facilities to increase retail participation including wider access to bank finance and new investor friendly schemes such as Applications Supported by Blocked Amount (ASBA) should be provided. The divestment programme has yielded rich returns to the NTPC and others embarking on a follow-on issue. Their valuation has more than trebled. There is no reason to deny the small shareholder the benefits.
100) dvertising, Bollywood, Corporate power
P. Sainath
Issues today have to be dressed up in ways certified by the corporate media. They have to be justified not by their importance to the public but by their acceptability to the media, their owners and sponsors.
That the terrible tragedy in Pune demands serious, sober coverage is a truism. One of the side-effects of the ghastly blast has been unintended, though. The orgy of self-congratulation that marked the media coverage of just about everything since January is now in pause mode. Maybe the flak they copped for their handling of the November 2008 Mumbai terror blasts has something to do with it. But there is, so far, some restraint. At least, relative to the meal they made of the 2008 blasts.
Otherwise, through January and early February, the media stood up bravely for freedom of expression and some other constitutional rights you've never heard of. They slew the demons of lingual chauvinism and worse. And they're just spoiling for a fight with any other enemy of our proud democracy. Just so long as they can keep Bollywood in central focus.
Every issue is now reduced to a fight between individuals, heroic, villainous or just fun figures. So the complex issues behind the shunning of Pakistani cricketers by the Indian Premier League are reduced to a fight between Shah Rukh Khan and Bal Thackeray. (As one television channel began its programme: “Shah Rukh stands tall. His message to the nation ...”). The agonies of Bundelkhand are not about hunger and distress in our Tiger Economy. They are just a stand-off between Rahul Gandhi and Mayawati. The issues of language and migrations in Maharashtra are merely a battle between Rahul Gandhi and Uddhav Thackeray. And the coverage is all about who blinked first, who lost face.
The devastating rise in food prices (let's skip the boring factors) and the mess in agriculture are a face-off between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar. The pathetic squabble within the Samajwadi Party is virtually a television serial. A blow-by-blow account of Amar Singh's valiant bid to retain his honour against Mulayam Singh's yahoos. (Indeed, some Hindi channels have begun using the language of theatre to report it — Act II, Scene II. And there was one programme which Mr. Amar Singh ended humming verses from his favourite film song). The Bt brinjal story had mostly only one villain — Union Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh. He had no visible adversary unless you pose the humble Brinjal as the hero. But that won't work for television. The other, more sinister heroes in this media story preferred to function from behind the scenes, plying newspapers and channels with faked data and false information. Hell hath no fury like a powerful corporate scorned, as the Minister is learning.
Issues? The same media that passionately fought for freedom of expression for a month from mid-January had billed the 2009 Lok Sabha poll as one without issues. The country was actually burning with them, but they didn't make good television either. More accurately, the dominant media hadn't the slightest intention of covering them with any sincerity. The story of rising food prices remains one of the worst reported — no matter how much space it has been given. Sure, there have been exceptions — as in the case of some outstanding reports on Bundelkhand. But they've been just that. Exceptions.
If these last six weeks have been about freedom of expression, we have neither. Or, at best, a twisted freedom and a tortured expression. There is little freedom for thousands of journalists in the corporate media and the few editors who still believe we ought to be doing a better job of informing the public on the key issues of our time. There's very little freedom for readers or viewers, too. For days on end, it didn't matter which television channel you switched to, it was SRK on all of them. When that movie drew to a close, the 'Rahul Gandhi storms Sena den' film was released and sustained. A visit of some hours produced days of footage. But with the end of Mr. Gandhi's visit to Mumbai, it was back to Shah Rukh Khan. Of course, viewers had the freedom to choose, which sets us apart from totalitarian states. They could choose any channel, from among many, to watch SRK saying exactly the same thing, at the same time. And they will be free to choose again when the figure is Amitabh Bachchan or Aamir Khan.
If what we've watched on critical issues these past weeks is expression, we're through scraping the barrel. We're drilling holes in its bottom.
Many corporate-owned media houses have sacked hundreds of journalists and non-journalist staff since late 2008. Hundreds of other journalists have suffered wage cuts. Of course, the ‘right to know' of readers and viewers does not extend to this information. Why scare the poor lambs? And how can you tell them the truth about that while everyday crowing about the once-again booming economy? It might lead audiences to ask that dull, boring question: “If things are so good, why are you axing so many people?” Answering that means revealing the interests the corporate media have in the fate of the stock market. It means talking about their need to keep the shares of the companies they are linked to (or have heavily invested in) afloat and buoyant. That is regardless of how rotten they are within. No matter how their own shares in those companies were obtained. And no agonising over how unethical the means used to keep them heated. This was in part behind the fatwa issued by some newspapers to their staff banning the ‘R' word last year. Recession is what happens in the United States. In India, it was a slowdown — and it's already turning around brilliantly. The hundreds of sacked and ruined staff have little freedom to speak of. Even the professional communicators within them cannot tell their own audiences their story. Cannot tell them they were laid off, let alone tell them why.
Leave aside escaping a recession, India Shining is back. The cover story of a leading weekly gushes over the fantastic ‘rural resurgence' that is, in fact, saving all of us. Farmers are doing just great. Drip, micro-sprinkler, and other micro irrigation, the stories in it suggest, played a major role in this hidden-from-the-human-eye revival. This resurgence is seen more in urban media than in rural India. And the proliferation of such stories across the media spectrum reflects, in part, the strenuous media efforts of a major Maharashtra-based company. A corporate group that spends a fortune on propaganda and whose interests in this line of irrigation are pushed by some of the most powerful members of the Union Cabinet. Oddly, stories such as these come out even as the government's own projections for growth in agriculture are dismaying.
The main ‘rural resurgence' story hit the stands the same day the National Crime Records Bureau officially brought the 2008 data for farm suicides on to its website. The 16,196 suicides that year brought the tally of farmers' suicides since 1997 to 199,132. That's the largest single, sustained wave of such suicides ever recorded in history — anywhere. Guess nobody told them about the resurgence. Farmers in 2008 did know of that year's loan waiver, but it didn't stop large numbers of them from taking their lives.
The ‘rural resurgence' story comes after any number of the government's own committees, commissions and reports suggest that it revise poverty figures upwards. Whether it's the Suresh Tendulkar committee, the BPL Expert Group, or earlier the National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganised sector. Or a U.N. study which reports that 34 million more Indians remained poor or joined their ranks in 2008 and 2009, because of the ‘slowdown.' That is, 34 million more than would have met that fate prior to the 2008 crisis. It matters little if Census data show us that 8 million cultivators quit agriculture between just 1991 and 2001. (That is, on average, well over 2,000 a day, every day for 10 years.) Or that the 2011 Census just months from now will show us how many more have fled agriculture since then, un-seduced by the rural resurgence. Never mind the facts. One giant private irrigation company stands to make its already huge fortune bigger. Good for growth.
The ABC of Indian media roughly translates as Advertising, Bollywood and Corporate power. Some years ago, the ‘C' would have been cricket, but that great sport is fast becoming a small cog in the large wheel of corporate profit. (In the IPL, the ABC of media converge, even merge.) And, of course, everything but everything, has to be bollywoodised. To now earn attention, issues have to be dressed up only in ways certified by the corporate media. They have to be justified not by their importance to the public but by their acceptability to the media, their owners and sponsors. The more entrenched that ABC gets, the greater the danger to the language of democracy the media so proudly claim to champion.
101) For Indo-Pakistan concord
V.R. Krishna Iyer
The supreme act of patriotism for both Indians and Pakistanis will be to stop the confrontation between their two countries and establish just peace.
Who but the justices of the sub-continent will tell the governing classes of India and Pakistan to go for an “ephphatha” to make both countries listen to possible settlement measures as an urgent desideratum for survival and development? (Ephphatha is an Aramaic word that means “to be opened.”)
We are ready for peace talks, India had said. That statement was welcomed by Pakistan. The start of a serious, responsible dialogue is bound to produce — if it turns out to be successful — peace and prosperity, and augur well for a new world order. But communal views today mar harmony among the Indo-Pakistan humanity. Such an epic event cannot happen merely by the leaders meeting and talking. It requires a powerful awakening among the masses on both sides.
At the bottom of it all is the Kashmir dispute, which is now communal as well as military. Meanwhile, China and the U.S. tacitly support Pakistan.
Is Jammu & Kashmir a theological state? No. It was not an Islamic state because its royal ruler was a Hindu. Nor was it a Hindu state since the bulk of its population was Muslim. The Hindu ruler acceded his territory to the Indian Republic, a secular, socialist state. And the only political organ of J&K was the National Conference, which was Muslim-oriented. Its outstanding leader was Sheikh Abdullah. The leader of the pro-Pakistan group, and Pakistan's first President, was M.A. Jinnah. This thoroughly westernised barrister was in his younger days a member of the Congress, before switching over to the Muslim League. His first messages to Pakistan were secular in nature.
When the second Prime Minister of India, Lal Bahadur Shastri, suddenly died in Tashkent in the Soviet Union, his bier was carried, among others, by the President of Pakistan who was there for bilateral talks. What a fine gesture it was. A notable memorial for Shastri today stands in Tashkent. There is indeed a bedrock of sanity and amity between the two peoples and their leaders.
A resident of Tirur in Kerala's Malabar region was the secretary of a political party in Pakistan, and on the few occasions I visited Pakistan decades ago he used to call on me with affection. There was a People's Human Rights Commission headed by a former Chief Justice of Pakistan who cherished my presence. When Zia-ul Haq, the President of Pakistan, died, a Chief Justice was made pro-tem President. He invited me to his palace. He said that house was honoured by my entry.
Political obscurantism
Indo-Pakistan friendship will thrive if it is cultivated. It will mark a benign portent if both countries come to terms with each other. A 21st century Indo-Pakistan concord will be a historic event in Asia. What then stands in the way? It is nothing but political obscurantism. The army can win only with the common person supporting it. If it is to become feasible, there must be a people's peace movement. So we now want people's peace.
“There never was a good war or bad peace,” wrote Benjamin Franklin. The supreme act of patriotism for Indians and Pakistanis will be to stop the confrontation between their countries and establish just peace. A creative federalism can end the war tomorrow.
What is the way to create Indo-Pakistan understanding and friendship? This should be done not only by politicians but also by the people. Islam stands for peace and stability. Unfortunately, Jinnah, Pakistan's founder-leader, was secular and loved his Malabar Hill bungalow in Bombay till the end. But since then communalism has conditioned the people's outlook. Therefore the mullahs and the moulvis and other theological species have made Pakistan an Islamic state. It is said that Jinnah did not know how to read the Koran. But today the Koran is the Constitution and the political leaders are intrinsically Islamic.
One of the first pre-conditions for Indo-Pakistan rapport is a solution to the J&K issue. The legal accession by the Maharaja made that State an integral part of the Indian Republic. Nevertheless, certain determined elements are today ready to die for the “cause.”
The Indian Constitution stands for religious liberalism, and J&K need not worry even for a moment that Islam would be in danger or the faith would be fouled by it being a part of India. The huge expenditure on maintaining war-readiness is a grave drain on the resources of both countries. The role of the U.S. in subsidising Pakistan with weapons has, over time, made it a dependant of America. It is a pity the U.S. moved huge quantities of weaponry into Pakistani hands on the pretext of driving out the Soviet Union from Afghanistan. That military assistance still swells Pakistan's arms arsenal.
When Jawaharlal Nehru once protested to President Eisenhower about the inequity, he virtually advised India to beg the U.S. for arms. Nehru, with his characteristic pride, famously told the U.S. President that Indians were no international mendicants for weapons. What is more disconcerting is that China is today with Pakistan. Equally unfortunate is the fact that the Soviet Union, which was once a close ally and could balance out the U.S. aid to Pakistan, is no longer around, and its successor-state is not as powerful as the Soviet Union was. These developments in China and Russia have made an adverse difference to India.
Statesmanship argues powerfully for a settlement of the Indo-Pakistan estrangement.
Today both countries are largely insensitive to the cause of peace. Some Jesus must whisper into their minds an ephphatha. Let us prove the Mahatma right when he observed: “A day will come when the world will approach India in its quest for peace and India will become the light of the world.”
There are many Hindu religious centres and even a Hindu college still on Pakistan territory. The converse is true, too: Ajmer in Rajasthan is an important religious centre for the Muslim community. General Zia used to make pilgrimages to the Ajmer shrine. Religion is irreligious if it divides. Allah is the cosmos of one world; so is Adi Sankara's Advaita. The state is secular. There is no Islamic Pakistan or Hindu Bharat; all belong to the same universe. Bigotry is anti-God. God is no fanatic; he does not kill but integrates and fraternises. We are all one.
The possession of nuclear weapon capability by both countries is a grave danger. Either ban it from both, or have a joint control body. Or else, at some stage of the conflict both New Delhi and Islamabad will turn to ashes. These thoughts have burning relevance now since representatives of both countries are going to meet later this month, apparently without reservations. India had suspended a four-year-old peace process with Pakistan after the 26/11 attacks on Mumbai by Pakistan-based Islamist militants in 2008.
When Nikita Khrushchev sent Soviet warships to Cuba with nuclear arms, John F. Kennedy said his fleet, duly armed, would stop that advance. A world-scale confrontation seemed imminent. At that point, one great man, Bertrand Russell, travelled from city to city and held press conferences. In London he told the British people that unless the disaster was averted they would not eat their breakfast the following day. But none, not even Nehru, woke up to his message. Except one man: Khrushchev himself. He withdrew the Soviet fleet, and saved the world.
A similar drama awaits us unless potential nuclear terrorism is stopped right now. Dinner parties in Delhi and Id events in Islamabad will all end. Tomorrow may be too late. It needs no astrologer to predict that the Asian humanity's survival is in peril. Awake, arise. It's now or never.
102) “Smoke has not stopped from the guns,” warns 22-year-old Chandra Bahadur Giri. “The revolution has not stopped yet and we have not forgotten how to use the guns,” he added, giving vent to his anger at a process that took three years of his life and was now placing him in unfamiliar territory.
Chandra was one of the 493 People's Liberation Army (PLA) members discharged in Surkhet on February 3 after they failed to be recognised as “qualified combatants” by the United Nations. About 4,008 such people had been living in cantonments monitored by the United Nations along with 19,692 other qualified combatants since the then Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) signed a peace deal in 2006 and the PLA, the combat wing of the party, laid down arms.
More than half of them were assessed to be minors when the U.N. carried out a verification process soon after the 2006 deal. The rest were found to have been recruited after the ceasefire and hence, could not be categorised as combatants. The 2006 agreement said these people had to be freed immediately and the qualified combatants be managed but Nepal's political instability and the Maoists' unwillingness to discharge them caused the process to be delayed by nearly three years.
Finally, in a process that culminated on February 8, 2,394 people have been released from the camps (others had left the cantonments before the discharge process started) but their loss of years and the proposed rehabilitation programme have angered them.
Under the rehabilitation plan chalked out by the UNICEF and the government, those who could not complete their studies after they joined the party will be provided free education. Those who want to start businesses will be given training and financial assistance. Those who want to join the medical field will be trained as health workers and community medical assistants.
But Bhupal and David, two young men listening to their Division Commander bidding them farewell in Surkhet on February 3, said they do not want these packages.
They said their “militarised” minds would not accept agricultural training or business. “We can provide security at our disputed border and we can prove that we are not unqualified,” one of them said. The Maoists have been quite vocal in recent times on the “encroachment” by India on Nepali land.
At the event, some of those about to be discharged had come in an inebriated state and broke chairs. They said it was a conspiracy by the U.N. and the government to send them away from the camps.
Their anger was reflected by deputy commander of the PLA Chandra Prakash Khanal “Baldev”. “We're carrying out this process with discontent,” he said. He criticised Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal's action plan for the management of the PLA combatants. The open field where the discharge ceremony was taking place thundered with applause and whistles suggesting that his remarks struck a chord.
The crowd was less enthused by U.N. Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator Robert Piper's speech encouraging them to be teachers, health workers, mechanics, masons and plumbers.
The anger did not seem out of place when a young girl who did not want to be named said she could have finished her schooling if she had been discharged three years back. She had completed her eighth grade when she joined the PLA as a minor.
Also, those disqualified were being sent home with a cash support of NPR 22,000, a paltry sum compared to what they could have earned even as daily-wage earners had they been working for the last three years.
The U.N. has said it will monitor those discharged for six months so that they do not become associated with criminal or violent groups. But there have been reports of former combatants joining underground armed groups.
On the last day of the discharge ceremonies in Rolpa on February 8, chief of the United Nations Mission in Nepal (UNMIN, which monitors the Maoist cantonments) Karin Landgren said the major challenge ahead was consolidating peace and preventing future conflicts. To achieve this, the government and the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) must work together to institutionalise peace and show the right direction to the youth so that they contribute to the rebuilding of this war-affected nation.
103) Global meltdown wipes out Asia's gains
Prime Sarmiento
The global economic crisis has wiped out developing Asia's recent gains in poverty eradication as the meltdown is expected to have driven 21 million more people in the region into poverty.
A joint report by the United Nations and the Asian Development Bank shows that the global economic slowdown has slackened trade, slashed export and tourism receipts and raised unemployment levels. This makes it difficult for the region to achieve its Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which range from halving extreme poverty to halting the spread of HIV and AIDS and providing universal primary education, all by the target date of 2015. “While the slowdown is likely to be felt first in higher unemployment, the effects are likely to ripple through Asia Pacific economies, reducing employment and job creation, and leading to cuts in household and government budgets with eventual consequences for the MDGs in terms of higher levels of poverty and threats to standards of health and education,” according to the report “Achieving the Millennium Development Goals in an Era of Global Uncertainty.” The report, released on Wednesday in Manila, was prepared by the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
“Asia, as a whole, has been achieving many of the MDG targets but progress in some countries has been slow,” said Noeleen Heyzer, executive secretary of ESCAP.
Asia Pacific is home to some of the world's fastest growing economies such as China and India, but it is also where some of the world's poor live. In India alone, more than 400 million people are in “extreme poverty”, subsisting on less than $1.25 a day.
Prior to the economic crisis, the region as a whole posted notable gains in its MDG commitments and is on track to achieve three important targets: gender parity in secondary education, ensuring universal access of children to primary school, and halving the proportion of people living in extreme poverty. Between 1990 and 2005, the Asia Pacific region cut the number of people living below the $1.25 a day poverty line from 1.5 billion to 979 million. China led the region's hard — won gains, reducing poverty level from 60 per cent to 16 per cent.
“New poor”
Ms Heyzer said that the global meltdown, which led to massive job losses, has created the “new poor” in the region. The International Labour Organisation estimated that the number of unemployed in Asia may have risen to more than 98 million in 2009. This will raise the unemployment level from 4.7 per cent in 2007 to 5.1 per cent in 2009. Job losses, combined with inadequate social protection, has put more people into poverty. “Without better protection, people fall back into poverty with economic crisis, health pandemics and natural disasters and cannot recover easily, making the achievement of MDGs more difficult,” said Ajay Chhibber, UNDP Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific and U.N. Assistant Secretary-General. Most Asian economies offer social protection such as social insurance schemes. But the joint ADB-U.N. report noted that that across the region, only 20 per cent of the unemployed and underemployed have access to labour market programmes such as unemployment benefits; and only 30 per cent of older people receive pensions. The report said that while Asian governments launched fiscal stimulus packages which kept their economies afloat amidst the recession, a huge chunk of the stimulus went to infrastructure and not on social protection.
The report notes that if fiscal stimulus packages have a strong component of social expenditures, this is likely to produce a double dividend: faster economic growth and accelerating progress towards the MDGs. “Most stimulus measures have focussed on areas other than social expenditures,” said ADB Vice-President Ursula Schaefer-Preuss. — Xinhu
104) World held hostage to weak U.S. policy
Isabel Hilton
Climate policy is stymied by Barack Obama's weakness and Senate recalcitrance.
In Delhi last week, Professor Jeffrey Sachs, the guru of sustainable development from Columbia University, delivered a sobering message about U.S. climate politics. There was very little chance, he said, that the U.S. would pass climate legislation this year and almost no chance the Senate would ever adopt cap—and—trade, the system by which enterprises trade permits to emit within ever tighter limits. He himself, he added, was not sorry. He strongly preferred a carbon tax as a simpler and more effective mechanism.
There are many who share his preference, but the chances of the U.S. legislating such a tax seem equally remote. Besides, if the U.S. turns away from carbon trading, the future of other carbon trading systems seems perilous.
For the EU in particular, this is bad news. If Sachs is right, the chances that the Copenhagen accord, a vague statement of intent to limit the global average temperature rise to 2C, will be translated into a legally binding instrument with some chance of achieving that goal become very slim. If the U.S. cannot legislate, it cannot sign or comply with a new treaty. Without the U.S., China and India will not take on legally binding commitments. Without the world's biggest emitters, efforts to limit emissions will fail.
The Obama administration, according to Sachs, has not abandoned the battle. If it cannot fight a climate bill through the Senate, there are alternatives. One is to go for a simpler energy bill to mandate efficiencies and promote alternatives to fossil fuels, since even the most recalcitrant coal — state Senators might be persuaded that U.S. dependence on “foreign oil” is a national security weakness. And, in the absence of emissions legislation, the administration can use presidential powers and the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate the country's path to a cleaner, greener future.
Both are under active consideration. But nothing can disguise the fact that the overarching framework of the Kyoto protocol, with its potential to unlock finance for clean development in the emerging economies, has no future under this scenario. Given the condition of public finances in the developed world, there is little prospect of western taxpayers stepping up with the sums required. Without private sector finance, the framework begins to crumble away.
Kyoto, it is worth remembering, was largely a U.S. invention, the means by which the Clinton administration could discuss financing climate mitigation without mentioning tax. Other nations reluctantly accepted it in order that the U.S., then the world's biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, could be included in the global effort to curb them. But though Clinton signed the treaty, Congress rejected it. Now the U.S. wants to dismantle it, blaming Europe for its inefficiencies and modest achievements.
It is not just in Europe that cap-and-trade has supporters. At state level in the U.S., limited forms of it exist: nine north-eastern states have been trading emissions from power plants, and a coalition of seven U.S. states and five Canadian provinces have been working towards building their own cap-and-trade system, due to begin trading in 2012.
That initiative, however, also faces trouble. In one member state, Utah, politicians have approved a resolution which implies climate change science is a “conspiracy”. Another, Arizona, dropped out of cap-and-trade plans last week, citing recession as its excuse. And California's impressive climate programme is under attack on similar grounds from Dan Logue, a Republican member of the state assembly. Plus, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is stepping down this year and it is by no means clear a successor will continue his climate policies.
A year ago, it seemed so different: in his first state of the union address, President Obama advocated an annual investment of $15bn in clean energy research and development. In the economic stimulus package that followed, billions were pledged to energy R&D, while the president's commitment to climate legislation seemed to promise the framework that would ensure such technologies were deployed.
Today, Mr. Obama's promising vision is faltering at best; the U.S. risks turning its back on the chance to dominate the next technology revolution, and global efforts to accommodate the administration's efforts to put more than a decade of U.S. climate recalcitrance behind it have not met with a corresponding policy delivery from Washington.
U.S. climate battles seem mired in the administration's political weakness and the Senate's departure from its mission to serve the public interest. This is not just a tragedy for the U.S. We are all hostage to its climate policy. — © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
105) Big firms drop support
Suzanne Goldenberg
Barack Obama suffered a setback to his green energy agenda on Tuesday when three major corporations — including BP America — dropped out of a coalition of business groups and environmental organisations that had been pressing Congress to pass climate change legislation.
The defections by ConocoPhillips, America's third largest oil company, Caterpillar, which makes heavy equipment, and BP rob the U.S. Climate Action Partnership of three powerful voices for lobbying Congress to pass climate change law.
They also undercut Mr. Obama's efforts to cast his climate and energy agenda as a pro-business, job-creation plan. Only hours earlier, Mr. Obama and other cabinet officials had made a high-profile announcement that $8.3bn was being awarded in loan guarantees for a company building the first new nuclear reactors in America in nearly 30 years.
But the loan decision in favour of Southern Company, which was framed by the White House as a kick-start for new nuclear plants, was upstaged by the departure of the big three firms from the climate partnership. Officials from BP and ConocoPhillips said that the proposals before Congress for curbing greenhouse gas emissions did not do enough to recognise the importance of natural gas, and were too favourable to the coal industry. — © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
Corrections and clarifications
The second paragraph of a report “A repository of seeds in the Himalayas” (February 17, 2010) was “Nestled 17,500 m high on a cliff top in the Himalayas, Chang-La has the sub zero temperatures and low humidity necessary to suspend seed life for future generations.” It should have been “17,500 feet”.
The first paragraph of an article “China challenges Obama's Taliban plan” (Editorial page, February 15, 2010) was “U.S. President Barack Obama's plan to reconcile with the Taliban in Afghanistan ought to win him a second Nobel, although during the entire period between 1901 and 2009, a Peace Prize was never awarded twice to any of its 97 individual recipients.” A reader said that the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize twice in 1954 as well as in 1981 (since they are also included in the list of 97 individual recipients of the Peace Nobel from 1901 till 2009).
The writer clarifies that the Peace Nobel has been awarded to 97 individuals and 20 organisations so far. The reference in the article was specifically to the 97 “individual recipients” — and not to organisations such as the UNHRC, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) which got the award more than once. As in the case of Al Gore and the UN task force on climate change, at times an individual recipient shared the prize with an organisation. But the issue is that there have been 97 individual recipients and none of them ever won twice, while two organisations (the UNHRC and the ICRC) out of the 20 that were recipients won twice.
It is the policy of The Hindu to correct significant errors as soon as possible. Please specify the edition (place of publication), date and page.
The Readers' Editor's office can be contacted by
Telephone: +91-44-28418297/28576300 (11 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday to Friday);
Fax: +91-44-28552963;
E-mail: readerseditor@thehindu.co.in
Mail: Readers' Editor, The Hindu, Kasturi Buildings,
859 & 860 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002, India.
All communication must carry the full postal address and telephone number.
No personal visits.
The Terms of Reference for the Readers' Editor are on www.thehindu.com
106) India's flawed fight against Maoists
Mao Zedong's famous aphorism on guerrilla war is taught at counter-insurgency courses across the world: “the enemy advances, we retreat; the enemy camps, we harass; the enemy tires, we attack; the enemy retreats, we pursue.” It is unlikely the 24 police officers slaughtered by Maoist insurgents in West Bengal's Silda area earlier this week, or the forces who failed to respond to the massacre of villagers in the Bihar village of Kasari, had ever heard of the dictum – or had the opportunity to acquire the skills needed to fight the war they had been thrust into. Like police officers across the country, the forces who failed to defend innocent lives in Bihar, and to protect their own in West Bengal, had received only rudimentary training. Neither State has the facilities to impart anything other than routine parade-ground drills and outdated firing-range training to their armed forces. India's Maoist insurgents are not the fearsome adversaries the media sometimes make them out to be. Like the police, they are badly trained and equipped. However, the insurgents have the advantage of knowledge of the terrain and the ability to melt into the population. In Andhra Pradesh, the crack Greyhounds counter-insurgency force has demonstrated that Maoist units crumble when confronted by skilled adversaries. The tragedies at Silda and Kasari have made it clear that simply pumping ill-trained police into the countryside will do nothing to win the insurgency.
If the battle against the Maoists is to be won, States will have to show the vision and resolve to create infrastructure of the kind Andhra Pradesh has built. The task, sadly, will need years of work. As this newspaper has pointed out on several occasions, India just does not have the numbers of police personnel needed to ensure law and order in normal circumstances, let alone protracted insurgencies. The United Nations recommend that 222 police officers be available for every 100,000 population; India has an average of just 125. In Bihar, the ratio is as low as 60 for every 100,000. Some of the States worst affected by Maoist violence also have an extremely poor presence of police, given their geographical area. Where New Delhi has 3,953 police officers in every 100 square km of its territory, Chhattisgarh has 22, Jharkhand 50, and Bihar 59. Police stations — the basic unit on which any security response depends — are decrepit, and often lack modern communication systems. In addition, the forces available have almost no meaningful training in counter-insurgency tactics. The Union government has sought to fill the void by pumping in Central Reserve Police Force units. While central forces have succeeded in restoring a semblance of order in some areas, their record of successful counter-Maoist operations has been poor. The central and State governments need to work together to draw up a map for building modern police infrastructure — or India's citizens will continue to pay a horrible price.
107) Politics under economics
At first sight, the Greek financial crisis poses serious problems for Greece, for the euro, and possibly for the status and standing of the European Union. The data are bleak. The GDP fell by 0.8 per cent in the last quarter of 2009, following slides of one, 0.3, and 0.5 per cent respectively in the previous three quarters; the government's own prediction of a 2010 slide of 0.3 per cent is widely considered an underestimate. The crisis has already had an impact, with the euro falling to $1.35 at one point, and all 16 eurozone countries face further falls through sales of the euro. The ratings agency Standard and Poor has downgraded the Greek sovereign debt. That makes the country's recent €2.5 billion three-month debt sale risky, as it implies Athens's lack of confidence in its own longer-term economic future. As for the EU, its rules allow bailouts only over specific projects, and it wants IMF help to be the last resort. France and Germany have expressed support, but privately accept that the eurozone might need to do more.
Closer analysis, however, shows a much more politically loaded picture. Prime Minister George Papandreou has pointed out that the crisis is largely the making of the previous conservative government. Secondly, the Chief Economist of the European Central Bank, Jürgen Stark, has confirmed that Athens manipulated economic statistics for years, which the EU's own monitoring procedures missed. Chancellor Angela Merkel's initial rejection of support for Athens may well have been motivated by the need not to alienate her coalition partner, the neoliberal Guido Westerwelle. The ideological issues involved are highly significant. The ratings agencies themselves gave major commercial banks top ratings just before those bodies collapsed in 2007-8. Finally, it must be remembered that other eurozone states and the international financial institutions may be acting as much out of ideological antipathy towards Greece's centre-left government as anything else. The IMF is notorious for ordering states to slash health and education spending as a precondition for loans. That would hit ordinary Greeks, among the worst paid workforces in the EU, very hard. Mr. Papandreou needs urgently to devise a workable and sustainable strategy to cope with these forces and factors.
108) Disciplining the judges
T.R. Andhyarujina
There is an urgent need to set up a credible statutory machinery to investigate charges against judges of the superior judiciary.
On the occasion of the Golden Jubilee of the Supreme Court of India in January 2000, the Chief Justice of India, Dr. A.S. Anand, proudly stated: “It is a matter of pride and satisfaction that the [Indian] judiciary today enjoys credibility far greater that that enjoyed by the other two wings of the state.”
A year later this feeling of self-satisfaction was rudely shaken when the succeeding Chief Justice, S.P. Bharucha, publicly lamented that “80 per cent of the judges in the country” were honest and incorruptible but a smaller percentage of them was “bringing the entire judiciary into disrepute.”
Since then, judges of at least eight High Courts have had charges of misconduct levelled against them. Two of them have resigned and two are facing removal through parliamentary procedure. Even if the charges against some judges remain unsubstantiated, the very fact that these have been aired has shaken public confidence in the higher judiciary.
The Constitution-makers only provided for the removal from office of Supreme Court and High Court judges by means of joint action by the two Houses of Parliament, for proved misbehaviour or incapacity. The Constitution-makers adopted this method of removal by impeachment by Parliament from the U.K. and the U.S. At that point in time in the U.K. the last instance of a judge being sought to be impeached had occurred two centuries earlier. And in the U.S. only one judge of the Supreme Court had been unsuccessfully impeached, in 1805.
Apparently the Constitution-makers believed that in India too the removal of judges of a superior court would be a rare occurrence. Sixty years later, the conditions are different. In 1950 the superior judiciary consisted of a body of eight judges of the Supreme Court and a few judges in nine High Courts. There are now 31 judges in the Supreme Court and over 750 in 21 High Courts. The winds of falling standards of public life have not avoided the judges of the superior courts. Charges of misconduct against judges of superior courts are now being frequently made. In the only instance in which impeachment was tried in 1993, in the case of Justice V. Ramaswamy of the Supreme Court, the method proved to be cumbersome, dilatory and political.
If the reputation of, and confidence in, the higher judiciary is to be maintained there is an urgent need to set up a credible statutory machinery for investigating charges against judges so that responsible criticism of the conduct of judges is immediately looked into and action taken, and at the same time unfounded allegations against them are nipped in the bud. For over 60 years there has been no such legal machinery. It is paradoxical that Chief Justice P.D. Dinakaran of the Karnataka High Court is facing impeachment proceedings for his removal only because of his proposed elevation to the Supreme Court, which prompted lawyers in Chennai to level serious charges of misconduct against him. Had there been a statutory body to investigate misconduct by judges, the allegations could have been referred to it earlier and the present fiasco could have been avoided.
Under current practice, to deal with such problems of delinquency the Chief Justice of India appoints a committee of judges to enquire into allegations of impropriety by judges of High Courts. Such committees, which do not have any authority of law to enquire into charges or summon evidence and effectively investigate the matter, have not inspired confidence in lawyers. Even if the committee finds a judge guilty of misconduct, he or she cannot be removed from office by the Chief Justice or even suspended.
A convenient way to avoid disciplinary action being taken against a judge who has come under a cloud has been for the Chief Justice of India to transfer him or her to another High Court. This sometimes results in protests from the Bar of the High Court to which he or she is transferred, which understandably does not want to have a delinquent judge in their court.
Another problem is that at times public criticism of the conduct of a judge by the media runs the risk of action for contempt of the court — as happened in Karnataka a few years back.
So long as the Constitution is not amended to delete the method of removal of judges by Parliament, there cannot be an alternative method for their removal. But short of removal of judges of the superior courts, there can be a law to investigate misconduct by judges and take appropriate action. The U.S. Constitution has the method of removal by impeachment of federal judges, but there is a supplemental law to consider complaints of misbehaviour by federal court judges and discipline them, short of their removal. The Judicial Councils Reform and Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980 which was made by Congress in consultation with the U.S. Supreme Court, provides a method by which federal judges can be effectively disciplined by their own peers.
In the U.S. in 1993, a National Commission set up by Congress to consider Judicial Discipline and Removal of Judges reported that with the 1980 Act there was no need to change the constitutional method of removal by Congress as the 1980 Act was a credible supplement to it. The Commission found that the most important benefit of the 1980 Act was the impetus it gave to the informal resolution by the judiciary itself of the problem of judicial misconduct.
Under the 1980 U.S. Act, complaints that a judge “has engaged in conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of courts” can be made to the Chief Judge of a Judicial Council of Judges. If the complaint is frivolous it is dismissed. If not, it is investigated by a special committee of judges. Upon receiving their report, the Judicial Council may take one of five steps. It may direct the judge under investigation to take such action as the Judicial Council may deem fit. It may request the judge to retire voluntarily. It may order that no further cases be assigned to him for the time being. It may censure or reprimand such a judge publicly or privately. Or, if the judge deserves removal, his or her case is reported to the House of Representatives for impeachment. The judge has a full opportunity to defend himself or herself and he or she has a right of review by a higher Federal Judicial Conference. The proceedings of the Judicial Council are confidential. Experience shows that a judge who is found guilty resigns on an adverse report being made by the Judicial Council.
This method ensures the independence of the judiciary as the investigation is made by a peer body of judges, and at the same time it makes a deviant judge accountable to his or her own fraternity of judges. I have strongly recommended that a similar law requires to be made in India by Parliament in consultation with the Chief Justice of India. If made, it will provide a legal way to take disciplinary action against judges of superior courts. It will provide protection to judges against groundless charges being levelled against them, and at the same time satisfy lawyers and the public that complaints against judges of superior courts can be made and will be investigated by a lawful machinery. It will deter irresponsible allegations as heavy costs could be imposed on those who level them.
In 2006, a Judges (Inquiry) Bill was formulated by the Government of India on the recommendation of the 195th Report of the Law Commission. It had the essential features of the U.S. Judicial Council Act, 1980. It received the approval of the then Chief Justice of India in principle. Had it been passed by Parliament, many of the present problems of judicial misbehaviour could have been dealt with. Unfortunately, an adverse report on it was made by a Parliamentary Committee in August 2007, mainly for seeking to entrust the disciplinary action to a body composed only of judges. This criticism was misconceived. Only a peer body of judges should enquire into misconduct of judges. The belief that judges would protect their brethren is mistaken. Judicial Councils have worked satisfactorily in the U.S. and Canada. Such a body was also recommended by a committee to amend the Constitution that functioned under the former Chief Justice, M.N. Venkatachaliah.
The Law Minister has announced that a comprehensive Judges Standards and Accountability Bill is being drafted. Its contents have not been made public but we are told it would include provisions for judges to disclose their assets, lay down standards of conduct and provide for a machinery to investigate charges of misbehaviour. Such an enlarged legislation is bound to be controversial. It would be better if a simple and focussed bill on investigating the misbehaviour of judges was enacted along the lines of the Judicial Inquiries Bill of 2006. There is an urgent need for it.
( T.R. Andhyarujina is a Senior Advocate at the Supreme Court and a former Solicitor-General of India.)
109) A murder to fan more conflict
Seumas Milne
The media may revel in a Mossad hit, yet Britain's response to a plot that could threaten its own citizens has been craven.
Imagine for a moment what the reaction would be if Iranian intelligence was almost universally believed to have assassinated a leader of one of the organisations fighting the Tehran government in a western — friendly state. Then consider how Britain, let alone the U.S., might respond if the killers had carried out the operation using forged or stolen passports of citizens of four European states, including Britain, with dual Iranian nationality.
You can be sure it would have triggered a major international storm, stentorian declarations about the threat of state-sponsored terrorism, and perhaps a debate at the U.N. Security Council, with demands for harsher sanctions against an increasingly dangerous Islamic republic.
Substitute Israel for Iran, and the first part of that scenario is exactly what happened in Dubai last month. A senior Hamas official, Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, was murdered in his hotel room in what was widely assumed from the start to be an operation by the Israeli intelligence service Mossad. Less than a month later, strong suspicion has turned to as good as certainty with the revelation that the hit team had used the passport identities of six Britons with dual nationality and currently living in Israel.
Ripping spy yarn
But instead of setting off a diplomatic backlash, the British government sat on its hands for almost a week after it was reportedly first passed details of the passport abuse. And while the Foreign Office in London finally summoned the Israeli ambassador to “share information”, rather than protest, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown could on Wednesday only promise a “full investigation.”
In parallel with this languid official response, most of the British media have treated the assassination more as a ripping spy yarn than a bloody scandal which has put British citizens at greater risk by association with Mossad death squads. It was an “audacious hit”, the Daily Mail enthused, straight out of a “Frederick Forsyth page-turner”, while the Times revelled in an attack that resembled nothing so much as a “well-plotted murder mystery.”
Running throughout all this is a breathless awe at Mossad's reputation for ruthless brilliance in seeking out and destroying Israel's enemies. In reality, the Dubai operation was badly bungled, as the Israeli press has already started to acknowledge. Despite having the relatively easy target of an unarmed man in a luxury hotel in a non-hostile Gulf state, Mossad managed to get its agents repeatedly caught on CCTV and effectively exposed Israel's responsibility through the ham-fisted passport scam.
Dubai follows a long history of Mossad bungles, from its accidental 1970s killing of a Moroccan waiter in Norway, mistaken for a Palestinian Black September leader, through its failed assassination attempt against the Hamas leader Khalid Mish'al in Jordan in 1997, when agents had to take refuge in Israel's embassy and the U.S. forced Israel to produce the antidote for the nerve toxin used in the attack.
In that case, the would-be assassins were carrying the Canadian passports of Israeli citizens, apparently with their knowledge. But while Mossad has used British documents in other attacks, it has naturally steered clear of faking the passports of its U.S. sponsor. So at the same time as Israel is demanding the British government change the law without delay to prevent the arrest of visiting Israeli leaders on war crimes charges, what is Britain planning to do over the abuse of its citizens' identity to carry out state-directed murder? Very little, it seems. Part of the explanation has to be that Britain and the U.S. have of course been carrying out their own assassination campaigns, in violation of the laws of war, in Iraq and Afghanistan. In his new book on secret SAS operations in occupied Iraq, Mark Urban estimates that 350 to 400 were killed in covert British attacks. The Joint Special Operations Command run by General Stanley McChrystal, now U.S. commander in Afghanistan, was responsible for perhaps 3,000 deaths. In Pakistan, U.S. drone assassination attacks are now routinely carried out against Taliban and Al Qaeda targets, real or imagined.
Focus widened
And since launching its war on terror, the U.S. has also adopted Israel's practice, stretching back decades, of carrying out killings far from the theatre of war. First, Israel's attacks were targeted against PLO leaders; more recently against the Islamists. But since the fiasco of the Mish'al plot, its assassinations have mostly been confined to the West Bank and Gaza Strip, where Israel made a determined attempt over the past decade to decapitate Hamas of its entire leadership.
Now that focus has again widened. Under the direction of Mossad director Meir Dagan, Israel is running a region-wide underground war against the leaders of Hezbollah and Hamas — which have both maintained an effective ceasefire for more than a year — and their Syrian and Iranian backers. Since the killing of veteran Hezbollah leader Imad Mughniyeh in Damascus in 2008, Israeli-hallmarked assassinations have multiplied in Lebanon, Syria and Iran.
But coldblooded killing isn't only a morally repugnant crime. The lesson of colonial history is that decapitation campaigns against national resistance movements don't work. In the short term they can disrupt and demoralise, but if the movement is socially rooted, other leaders or even organisations will take their place. That was Israel's experience when it killed the Hezbollah leader Abbas al-Musawi and his family in the early 1990s, only for him to be succeeded by the more effective and charismatic Hassan Nasrallah. Such campaigns also tend to spread the war. Unlike the historic PLO factions, Hamas has always confined its armed attacks to Israel and the Palestinian territories. Writing in the London-based Guardian newspaper in 2007, Mish'al confirmed the “principle that the resistance should only be fought in Palestine.” But in the aftermath of the Dubai assassination, Hamas leaders have started to hint strongly that policy could now change, and that they could respond to Israel's attacks in “the international arena.”
If so, it would give an added dimension to the assessment by Ben Caspit in the Israeli newspaper Ma'ariv on Wednesday that the Dubai killing had been a “tactical operational success, but a strategic failure”. So far the response of British ministers to Mossad's provocation has been craven. Unless that changes fast, they can only increase the risk of being drawn further into a conflict ready to erupt again at any time. — © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
110) Turning patents into ‘invention capital'
Steve Lohr
An innovator seeking to elevate financial rewards for inventors or a cynical operator deploying his bulging patent trove as a powerful bargaining chip?
________________________________________
Patent world, a vastly underdeveloped market, is starved for private capital and too dependent on federal financing
Patents will eventually be valued as a separate asset class, like real estate or securities
________________________________________
Nathan Myhrvold wants to shake up the marketplace for ideas. His mission and the activities of the company he heads, Intellectual Ventures, a secretive $5 billion investment firm that has scooped up 30,000 patents, inspire admiration and angst.
Admirers of Myhrvold, the scientist who led Microsoft's technology development in the 1990s, see an innovator seeking to elevate the economic role and financial rewards for inventors whose patented ideas are often used without compensation by big technology companies. His detractors see a cynical operator deploying his bulging patent trove as a powerful bargaining chip, along with the implied threat of costly litigation, to prod high—tech companies to pay him lucrative fees. They call his company “Intellectual Vultures.”
White hat or black hat, Intellectual Ventures is growing rapidly and becoming a major force in the marketplace for intellectual capital. Its rise comes as Congress is considering legislation, championed by large technology companies that would make it more difficult for patent holders to win large damage awards in court — changes that Myhrvold has opposed in congressional testimony and that his company has lobbied against.
Intellectual Ventures spent more than $1 million on lobbying last year, according to public filings compiled by OpenSecrets.org. In the three most recent election cycles — 2006, 2008 and 2010 — Intellectual Ventures executives, led by Myhrvold, have contributed more than $1 million to Democratic and Republican candidates and committees.
Myhrvold makes no apology for playing hard under the current patent system. If his company is going to help change things, it must be a force to be reckoned with. “We have to be successful,” he said.
The issues surrounding Intellectual Ventures, viewed broadly, are the ground rules and incentives for innovation. “How this plays out will be crucial to the American economy,” said Josh Lerner, an economist and patent expert at the Harvard Business School.
Myhrvold certainly thinks so. He says he is trying to build a robust, efficient market for “invention capital,” much as private equity and venture capital developed in recent decades. “They started from nothing, were deeply misunderstood and were trashed by people threatened by new business models,” he said in his offices here.
Myhrvold presents his case at length in a 7,000-word article published on Thursday in the Harvard Business Review. “If we and firms like us succeed,” he writes, “the invention capital system will turbocharge technological progress, create many more new businesses, and change the world for the better.”
In the article and in conversation, Myhrvold describes the patent world as a vastly underdeveloped market, starved for private capital and too dependent on federal financing for universities and government agencies, which is mainly aimed at scientific discovery anyway. Eventually, he foresees patents being valued as a separate asset class, like real estate or securities.
His antagonists, he says, are the “cozy oligarchy” of big technology companies like IBM, Hewlett-Packard and others that typically reach cross-licensing agreements with each other, and then refuse to deal with or acknowledge the work of inventors or smaller companies.
Ignoring the patents of others is “deeply ingrained in parts of certain industries,” he writes in the article, “most notably software, computing and other Internet-related sectors.”
Large technology companies complain about patent suits but, Myhrvold says, their actions often invite litigation. “The attitude of the big guys has been that unless you sue me or threaten to sue me, get lost,” he said in the interview. “I know, I was one of those guys.” Indeed, Myhrvold, 50, supplied his considerable brain power to Microsoft for 13 years, serving as chief technology officer until 2000.
Myhrvold personifies the term polymath. He is a prolific patent producer himself, with more than 100 held or applied for. He earned his Ph.D. in physics from Princeton and did post-doctorate research on quantum field theory under Stephen Hawking, before founding a startup that Microsoft acquired.
He is an accomplished French chef, who has also won the national barbecue contest in Tennessee. He is an avid wildlife photographer, and he has dabbled in paleontology, working on research projects digging for dinosaur remains in the Rockies.
His Intellectual Ventures is not simply a patent hedge fund. Its 650 employees include scientists and engineers, and it has an in-house invention effort and lab that last year applied for 450 patents. To date, the company has paid $315 million to individual inventors.
He calls patents “the next software,” noting that software did not become a market on its own until the 1980s, spurred by innovators and the enforcement of intellectual property laws. “I'm trying to get inventions that kind of respect as an economic entity,” he said. Yet while Myhrvold is saying one thing, his company's main activity is quite another, according to Mark Bohannon, general counsel and senior vice-president for public policy for the Software and Information Industry Association.
Intellectual Ventures, Bohannon says, is the largest of the category of firms that hold patents, but do not make products. Lawyers call such firms non-practising entities, NPEs, though they are often labelled as patent trolls. “Our concern is that it games the patent litigation system so it can extract licensing fees and investments from technology companies that create jobs, innovate and make products,” said Bohannon, whose trade association includes IBM, Google, Oracle, SAP and Adobe.
Several analysts say that Intellectual Ventures has been primarily a master practitioner of exploiting the current rules of the game to its advantage. Many companies in the patent field use shell companies to mask their activities, and Intellectual Ventures seems to employ them with uncommon frequency. A report last month by Avancept, an intellectual property consulting firm, said that up to 1,110 shell companies and affiliated entities appear to be linked to Intellectual Ventures. The secrecy, said Thomas Ewing, principal consultant for Avancept, makes it “far more difficult to confidently negotiate with Intellectual Ventures.”
Intellectual Ventures, founded in 2000, began operating in 2003. It says it has returned $1 billion to investors and collected more than $1 billion in licence fees to date. Most of the revenue has apparently come from 16 so-called strategic investors — big companies that pay to licence patent rights and get a stake in an Intellectual Ventures fund.
The companies must sign strict nondisclosure agreements to even talk with Intellectual Ventures. Only Microsoft has publicly stated that it is one of the group. In 2008, The Wall Street Journal reported that Verizon Communications had agreed to pay Intellectual Ventures $350 million.
Other companies that have agreed to sizable payments to Intellectual Ventures include Intel, Nokia and Sony, according to people told of deals. And Intellectual Ventures has sought deals with others, including IBM and Amazon, so far without success, say people informed of the talks.
Intellectual Ventures' penchant for secrecy, Myhrvold says, is partly a legacy from its early days as an upstart when it did not want to tip its hand. Personally, he says he advocates not only the public disclosure of patents but also license agreements, but he will not give up the competitive edge of secrecy unilaterally. “If everybody in the industry does it, I'll be right there,” Myhrvold said. — © 2010 New York Times News Service
111) Half of world's primate species face extinction
Alok Jha
Almost half of the world's primate species — which include apes, monkeys and lemurs — are threatened with extinction because of the destruction of tropical forests and illegal hunting and trade.
In a report highlighting the 25 most endangered primate species, conservationists have outlined the desperate plight of primates from Madagascar, Africa, Asia and Central and South America, with some populations down to a few dozen.
The golden headed langur, which is found only on the island of Cat Ba in north-eastern Vietnam, is down to 60 to 70 individuals. And there are fewer than 100 northern sportive lemurs left in Madagascar, and around 110 eastern black crested gibbons in north-eastern Vietnam.
Red list
Of the world's 634 primate species, 48 per cent are classified as threatened with extinction on the conservation group IUCN's “red list” of threatened species. The latest report was compiled by 85 primatologists working in the field.
“All over the world, it's mainly habitat destruction that affects primates the most,” said Christoph Schwitzer, head of research at the Bristol Conservation and Science Foundation and one of the authors of the report.
“Illegal logging, fragmentation of forests through fires, hunting is a big issue in several African countries and also now in Madagascar. In Asia one of the main problems is trade in hearts for traditional medicine, mainly into China.”
Russell Mittermeier, a primatologist and president of Conservation International, said:
“The purpose of our top 25 list is to highlight those that are most at risk, to attract the attention of the public, to stimulate national governments to do more, and especially to find the resources to implement desperately needed conservation measures ... we have the resources to address this crisis but so far we have failed to act.”
There are fewer than 320 Delacour's Langurs left in Vietnam, thanks to the trade in the animals' bones, organs and other tissues for traditional medicines. The Sumatran orang utan is down to around 6,600 due to fragmentation of their habitats and the removal of forest to make way for agricultural uses such as palm oil plantations.
Schwitzer said that the primate he monitors, the blue-eyed black lemur in Madagascar, has suffered from the rapid destruction of forests in recent years and now numbers no more than 2,300. “With the political crisis in Madagascar, this has been exaggerated in the last year or two, with lots more illegal logging.” Schwitzer hoped the new report would highlight the extent of the dangers facing some of humankinds' closest relatives in the wild.
“Support and action to help save these species is vital if we are to avoid losing these wonderful animals forever.” — © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
112) Where is the law to protect our children from sexual abuse?
Ananthapriya Subramanian
We urgently need legislation that specifically addresses child abuse.
________________________________________
The Indian Penal Code does not spell out the definition of child abuse as a specific offence
Even the Juvenile Justice Act does not specifically address the issue of child sexual abuse
________________________________________
The government's decision to introduce a set of guidelines for service providers in the tourism sector in a move to prevent a repeat of incidents like the rape of a Russian girl in Goa recently is indeed a welcome step. The code of conduct envisages, among other things, training tour operators and hotel staff on identifying and reporting potential cases of sexual exploitation of children.
These guidelines will help service providers in the tourism industry to contribute their mite in building a protective environment for children by establishing an ethical policy against commercial sexual exploitation of children. The code of conduct should be displayed in all tourist places of interest, hotels, resorts, etc.
The guidelines, which will go some way in addressing some of the horrifying aspects of child abuse, come as a response to the spate of recent news reports of tourists accused of paedophilia and pornography. While applauding the government's response, one cannot help but make the point that much more remains to be done in light of the chilling fact that India has the highest number of sexually abused children in the world. A study conducted by the Ministry of Women and Child Development, UNICEF and Save the Children in 2007 brought out some shocking facts about the extent of child abuse in India. Over 53 per cent of children reported having faced some form of sexual abuse. In fact, the study found that two out of every three children were physically abused. But the most shocking revelation is this: Most of the time, the abuse was perpetrated by someone known to the child or in a position of trust and responsibility. Not surprisingly, most children did not report the abuse to anyone.
No special law
Nineteen per cent of the world's children live in India. Over 440 million people in the country are aged 18 years and below and constitute 42 per cent of the total population. Signing up to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, India promised to protect its children from all forms of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse. Article 34 (a) enjoins State parties to prevent the inducement or coercion of a child to engage in any unlawful sexual activity. Yet, despite having the dubious distinction of having the highest number of sexually abused children in the world, there is no special law in India dealing with child abuse and child sexual abuse.
The Indian Penal Code does not spell out the definition of child abuse as a specific offence; neither does it offer legal remedy and punishment for “child abuse.” The IPC broadly lays out punishment for offences related to rape or sodomy or “unnatural sex.” The IPC laws are rarely interpreted to cover the range of child sexual abuse; the law relating to terms “sodomy” or “rape” are too specific and do not apply to acts like fondling, kissing, filming children for pornographic purposes, etc.
Even the law mandated with the welfare of children, the Juvenile Justice Act, does not specifically address the issue of child sexual abuse. It is difficult to apply the provisions of existing laws to any case of child abuse as it is easy for a defence lawyer to make use of the legal loopholes to facilitate their client's escape from punishment. Even if someone does get convicted under the IPC for rape, the maximum imprisonment is a mere two years.
We urgently need legislation that specifically addresses child abuse. The legislation must address all forms of sexual abuse including child prostitution and child pornography. But it should also deal with physical abuse, including corporal punishment and bullying and, trafficking of children. There is urgent need as well to have a functioning administrative system to record and register child abuse cases. Given the fact that the majority of children do not report sexual abuse to anyone, any law must look at mechanisms of reporting and persons responsible for reporting. Children need to be able to go to someone who they know will listen to them, protect them and take action on their behalf.
Merely enacting legislation will not be enough unless this is followed by strict enforcement of the law with accountability defined. Also, parents, teachers and others in the community have a vital role to protect children from sexual exploitation and abuse. Children are the country's greatest human resource and a measure of the country's social progress lies in the wellbeing of its children: that they are healthy, educated, safe, happy and have access to life opportunities.
( Ananthapriya Subramanian is Media and Communications Manager with Save the Children.)
113) WHO recommends A (H1N1) virus as seasonal flu vaccine
The World Health Organisation (WHO) recommended on Thursday that the pandemic A(H1N1) virus should be used for making seasonal influenza vaccines in the northern hemisphere.
Besides the pandemic A(H1N1) virus, the A(H3N2) virus and the influenza B virus should also be included in making influenza vaccines in the 2010 — 2011 northern hemisphere influenza season, the U.N. agency said in a statement. The recommendation was announced following a four-day closed-door meeting of influenza experts, which was meant to select the seasonal vaccine strains for the northern hemisphere. — Xinhua
Corrections and clarifications
It's the Gulf of Mannar. The last paragraph of a report “Bureau of Forest Genetics to be set up at Dehra Dun” (February 18, 2010) gave it incorrectly as the Gulf of Munnar. (The Gulf of Mannar Biosphere Reserve, off the south-eastern end of India, covers a vast area of ocean, islands and the adjoining coastline. The islets and coastal buffer zone include beaches, estuaries, and tropical dry broadleaf forests, while the marine environment includes seaweed communities, sea grass communities, coral reefs, salt marshes and mangrove forests.)
Mr. Shashank Manohar is the president of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI). The first paragraph of a report “Don't shift IPL matches out of A.P.” (February 18, 2010) said that Union Minister Mr. Sharad Pawar holds the post. Mr. Manohar, a Nagpur based lawyer, replaced Mr. Sharad Pawar on September 27, 2008, as the new president. Earlier, he was one of the five vice-presidents under Mr. Pawar.
The third paragraph of a report “Anand Mahindra named E&Y entrepreneur of the year 2009” (“Business” page, February 17, 2010) said that “the [Ernst & Young ‘Entrepreneur of the year 2009'] award for the Manager Entrepreneur of the year has gone to O. P. Bhatt, Chairman & Managing Director, State Bank of India”. The error was in Ernst & Young's press release. State Bank of India (SBI) clarifies that Mr. Bhatt is the Chairman, SBI. The bank has two managing directors (Mr. S.K. Bhattacharyya and Mr. R. Sridharan).
The fifth paragraph of a report “We want access to Headley: Chidambaram” (February 15, 2010) was “A majority of those injured were young people and the bakery was a small place measuring about 350 sq.m. just enough to accommodate 66 people.” It should have been “350 sq.ft”.
It is the policy of The Hindu to correct significant errors as soon as possible. Please specify the edition (place of publication), date and page.
The Readers' Editor's office can be contacted by
Telephone: +91-44-28418297/28576300 (11 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday to Friday);
Fax: +91-44-28552963;
E-mail: readerseditor@thehindu.co.in
Mail: Readers' Editor, The Hindu, Kasturi Buildings,
859 & 860 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002, India.
All communication must carry the full postal address and telephone number.
No personal visits.
The Terms of Reference for the Readers' Editor are on www.thehindu.com
114) Important caveats
The politicisation of policing is rampant across Indian States. When the police come under political pressure, they are known to serve as the handmaiden of the ruling party, whether in covering up failures and misdeeds of the administration or in targeting political opponents. In many such instances, courts have intervened in the interest of an impartial probe and ordered investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation. Therefore the ruling of a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court that the highest court in the land and the High Courts have the power to order, without the consent of the State government concerned, an investigation by the CBI into cognisable offences committed within its territory comes as no surprise. But importantly, while upholding the constitutional validity of an existing judicial practice, the court entered certain crucial caveats. Calling for great caution on this issue, the Bench asked the courts to “bear in mind certain self-imposed limitations on the exercise of these constitutional powers.” While disagreeing with the contention that the ordering of a CBI probe without the State government's consent would impinge on the federal structure of the Constitution and violate the doctrine of separation of powers, the Supreme Court ruled that such orders could not be passed as a matter of routine or on the basis of allegations against the local police by a party.
However, the judgment raises several other issues and concerns. For one thing, the CBI too is not insulated from political pressures. As was evident in the Bofors case, the CBI is susceptible to pressures from the central government just as the State police forces are to pressures from the party in power in the State. Preferring one agency at the expense of another is not the solution. Institutional mechanisms must be put in place to protect investigating agencies from the influence of their political masters. It is a sound principle of law that courts should not normally intervene at the stage of investigation; judicial intervention at this stage should come only in the face of overwhelming evidence of a possible miscarriage of justice. This is also because the primary responsibility for maintaining law and order rests with the State government, and ‘police' is in the State list. Courts have shown a tendency to overreach, to encroach on the powers of the executive. Each encroachment is made in the name of protecting civil liberties and fundamental rights of the citizens. But every time the courts do so without sufficient reason, the foundations of the Constitution are shaken. Wrong use of extraordinary provisions is the surest way of undermining them.
115) Test cricket is best
In an era of rampant commercialism and the rumbustious rise of Twenty20 cricket, pessimism regarding the well-being and future of the grand old game of Test cricket is common. But any suggestion of its impending demise is way off the mark. That the structure of the five-day game has a built-in resilience that helps it triumph over existential challenges was once again demonstrated in the second Test between India and South Africa in Kolkata. If the home team deserved credit for turning things around brilliantly after a pasting in the first Test at Nagpur, the operatic irresistibility of the Eden Gardens climax proved that Test cricket is in robust good health. Seat-edge endings in the abbreviated forms of the game often appear contrived and formulaic. But a result such as the one that saw India level the series against the Proteas with nine balls left has an authenticity that Test cricket alone can aspire to. It is a pity that it was not a full series of three or five Test matches and was squeezed in only after the Board of Control for Cricket in India was criticised for favouring the ODI and T20 formats at the expense of Test cricket. While it would be naïve to suggest that limited overs cricket might be a passing fad, it is the duty of the game's administrators to ensure that the best in the business play one another more often in Tests.
Which other form of the game provides the space for the sort of heroism that Hashim Amla displayed over the last two days at Eden Gardens? The South African, who batted 1,033 deliveries for 490 runs in three innings, exemplified the virtues of the longest format all through the series. He began at Nagpur with an unbeaten double hundred, after which his illustrious colleague, Dale Steyn, ripped the heart out of India's batting with a classical demonstration of pace bowling. Amla's battle with Harbhajan Singh on the final day in Kolkata was intriguing, although the tenacious Indian off-spinner triumphed in the end. But it was also a series that will be remembered for the batting exploits of Sachin the Great, world cricket's most thrilling batsman Virender Sehwag, exquisite strokemaker V.V.S. Laxman as well as the prodigiously accomplished Jacques Kallis and the ever-dependable M. S. Dhoni. In the end, India deserved to hold on to its No.1 Test ranking because it showed strength of character. After losing the toss and letting South Africa rattle up over 200 runs for the loss of just one wicket on the opening day, Dhoni's men played with great belief, commitment, and offensive skills to rewrite the script on a sporting wicket that made five days of old-fashioned cricket such a pleasure to behold.
116) Ukraine: a tale of two elections
Vladimir Radyuhin
Why did the U.S. and Europe hail the victory of Viktor Yanukovych whom they denounced as a crook five years ago?
The victory of the “pro-Russian” Opposition candidate, Viktor Yanukovych, in Ukraine's presidential election was greeted with dismay in the West as a setback to the “orange revolution” the United States and Europe helped orchestrate in the country five years ago.
The western media, however, took some consolation from the fact that the 2010 election was a clean and democratic race. This, they said, stood in stark contrast to the 2004 election, which was rigged in favour of Mr. Yanukovych, provoking large-scale street protests in capital Kiev. The “orange revolution” overturned Mr. Yanukovych's victory and vaulted his pro-western rival, Viktor Yushchenko, into presidency. Mr. Yanukovych has since become “contaminated with the ‘Orange virus',” as The Times put it, and the bad guy of the 2004 poll won a fraud-free election.
How far does this story square with reality? It would be interesting to compare the results of the 2004 and 2010 elections. In 2004, Mr. Yanukovych polled 49.46 per cent of the votes against Mr. Yushchenko's 46.61 in the run-off that was later overturned by the “orange revolution.” The 2010 vote tally was remarkably similar: Mr. Yanukovych garnered 48.95 per cent against 45.47 for Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, former “orange” ally-turned-foe of Mr. Yushchenko.
Could it be just a coincidence? Hardly so, if we look at the way the Ukrainian regions voted in both elections. In 2004, Mr. Yanukovych won 80-90 per cent of the votes in Russian-speaking eastern and southern provinces and Mr. Yushchenko received just as strong support in the western and central regions, oriented towards Europe. The east-west divide was strikingly evident again in the 2006 parliamentary election, in which Mr. Yanukovych's Party of the Regions won most votes.
In the Yanukovych-Tymoshenko faceoff in 2010, the pattern of voting was once again the same — the east and south voted for Mr. Yanukovych, and the west and the centre gave their votes to Ms Tymoshenko. This means the support base of the pro-Russian and pro-western candidates remains the same as it was five years ago. Those who voted for Mr. Yanukovych in 2004 backed him again in 2010.
The identical results refute the claim that in 2004, Mr. Yanukovych's returns were heavily padded, and in 2010 they were not. Yet the same western observers who denounced Mr. Yanukovych's victory in 2004 as fraudulent, in 2010 hailed it as “an impressive display of democratic elections.” Interestingly, the 2004 electoral violations were never properly investigated, and nobody was punished maybe because, as many analysts claimed, both sides resorted to rigging.
In 2004, the U.S. and other NATO countries refused to accept the legitimacy of Mr. Yanukovych's election and sent a high-power team of “mediators” to Kiev to push for a cancellation of the vote. A re-run of the run-off between Mr. Yanukovych and Mr. Yushchenko brought victory to the “orange revolution” leader with the score 52-44. However, the outcome was heavily impacted by media hysteria over alleged vote rigging and the West's massive support for the Opposition leader.
This year, western leaders, including U.S. President Barack Obama, congratulated Mr. Yanukovych on his victory without even waiting for the losing side to take its case to court. The West ignored Ms Tymoshenko's allegation that electoral fraud in the eastern and southern regions was just as bad as in 2004 and exceeded the 10,00,000-vote lead the official count gave to Mr. Yanukovych. “The so-called Orange Revolution … was essentially political theatre (or political circus) not more legitimate than the presidential elections that it overturned,” says analyst Vladimir Belaeff of the U.S. Global Society Institute.
Why did the U.S. and Europe in 2010 hail the victory of a man whom they denounced as a crook five years earlier? The western media called it the “Ukraine fatigue” — disappointment with the inefficient leadership in the past five years.
“Yushchenko proved to be one of the least competent politicians ever elected head of state,” writes U.S. Republican conservative Doug Bandow, former special assistant to President Ronald Reagan. “Ukrainian politics has been marred by corruption, vote fraud, brutal infighting and violence.”
During Mr. Yushchenko's presidency, bribery and cronyism have ballooned; his self-destructive war with the “orange” princess, Ms Tymoshenko, paralysed decision-making. Living standards declined, prices soared as the global crisis shattered Ukraine's commodity-sector economy.
“Ukraine's under-reformed economy teeters on the edge of national bankruptcy, the rule of law is elusive, courts remain corrupt and the parliament resembles a trading platform for business tycoons in which deals are made and seats bought and sold,” The Economist fumed.
However, the main reason for the “Ukraine fatigue” in the West lies in Mr. Yushchenko's foreign, rather than domestic, policies. His top-priority goals were to drag Ukraine into NATO, throw out the Russian Navy from its Soviet-era naval base in Sevastopol and turn the Black Sea into a NATO lake. However, Ukrainian voters rejected Mr. Yushchenko's anti-Russian policy, eliminating him from the presidential race with a dismal 5 per cent of the votes. To save her campaign, Ms Tymoshenko made a U-turn, from criticising Russia to vowing to rebuild close ties with Moscow. “As Yushchenko dramatically demonstrated, even the most committed pro-American candidate could not force his countrymen in a direction which they opposed,” said Mr. Bandow, who today works for the Cato Institute.
Mr. Yushchenko failed to advance the strategic objective of the U.S. “orange” project — tear away Ukraine from Russia and deny Russia a strategic reach in Europe and the Caucasus. As the former U.S. National Security Adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, wrote in his famous book The Great Chessboard: “Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be an empire in Eurasia.” “The Orange Revolution is dead,” Mr. Bandow wrote in the National Interest journal.
The end of the “orange” regime alters the balance of power in Eastern Europe. “Relations with Russia and the CIS [Commonwealth of Independent States, a Russia-dominated loose alliance of former Soviet republics] will be our priority,” Mr. Yanukovych said in his first statement after winning the run-off. “Our countries are closely tied by economy, history and culture.”
Mr. Yanukovych has voiced support for the Russian proposal to set up an international consortium to manage the Ukrainian gas pipelines, and called for joining the Customs Union Russia has set up with Kazakhstan and Belarus. This shift is dictated by economic realities: Russia meets 80 per cent of Ukraine's gas needs and, together with other former Soviet states, accounts for 34 per cent of Ukrainian exports. Russia is Ukraine's best hope of avoiding imminent national bankruptcy by playing “the role of ‘Abu Dhabi' to Ukraine's ‘Dubai',” as The Wall Street Journal put it.
Mr. Yanukovych has ruled out NATO membership for Ukraine and signalled his readiness to consider extending the basing rights of the Russian Black Sea Naval base in Sevastopol beyond 2017, when the current lease agreement expires. Without Ukraine, the U.S.-built cordon sanitaire around Russia will fall apart. Georgia, which is still reeling from the thrashing Russia gave it in a five-day war in 2008, has lost a valuable ally.
The U.S. is unlikely to accept these strategic shifts. In contrast to the heady days of the “orange revolution,” Washington did not openly interfere with the 2010 election in Ukraine. Some suggested that Mr. Obama did not want to jeopardise his policy of “reset” with Russia.
However, Washington has repeatedly stated in recent months that the “reset” does not mean U.S. recognition of Russia's special interests in the former Soviet Union. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stressed the point in a keynote address at Ecole Militaire in France last month. “We object to any spheres of influence claimed in Europe in which one country seeks to control another's future,” she said.
The newly appointed U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, John Tefft (whose previous assignment was Georgia), made it clear that the U.S. would continue its policy of driving a wedge between Ukraine and Russia. “…We have some serious differences with the Russians over the way they conduct relations with their neighbours,” he said in one of his first interviews to the Ukrainian media. “The administration has been quite clear about the Russians in Georgia, and we have been very clear in stressing our support for the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity in all of these countries, including Ukraine.”
The envoy said Washington remained committed to the idea of NATO membership for Ukraine.
“With regard to NATO, the Bucharest [2008 NATO summit] decision was made that Ukraine will become a member,” Ambassador Tefft said. Unless Moscow and Washington agree to extend their “reset” to the former Soviet space, the Ukrainian election will set the stage for a renewed battle for influence in Eurasia.
117) Corrections and clarifications
In connection with a report “Europe a growth market for outsourcing” (“Business” page, February 17, 2010), Gartner clarifies that the United Kingdom is forecast to spend $160 billion on outsourcing by 2011, and not $160 million as quoted in the third paragraph.
The last paragraph of a report “Bureau of Forest Genetics to be set up at Dehra Dun” (February 18, 2010) was “... to Malaysia and Indonesia into a national biodiversity fund, which will be distributed to the local community in Munnar in April.” As pointed out yesterday in this column, “Munnar” should have been “Mannar”.
It's the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, and not the RTI Act, 2006, as mentioned in the first paragraph of a report “Contempt of court petitions on the rise” (Some Tamil Nadu editions, February 17, 2010, page 1).
The heading of a report was “Scientist discovers Himalayan wildcat haven” (February 19, 2010), while the third paragraph included the tiger and the leopard in the list of wild cats. A reader said that as the tiger and leopard are known as “big cats”, the heading was incorrect. In response to a request for a clarification, Dr. R.J. Ranjit Daniels, wildlife ecologist, says that there is no reason why a tiger or a leopard should not be described as a wild cat. In the list in the report, all are wild cats and specialists make a distinction among them as “small cats” and “big cats” when they wish to exclude one or the other. All other than the domestic cat are wild.
It is the policy of The Hindu to correct significant errors as soon as possible. Please specify the edition (place of publication), date and page.
The Readers' Editor's office can be contacted by
Telephone: +91-44-28418297/28576300 (11 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday to Friday);
Fax: +91-44-28552963;
E-mail: readerseditor@thehindu.co.in
Mail: Readers' Editor, The Hindu, Kasturi Buildings,
859 & 860 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002, India.
All communication must carry the full postal address and telephone number.
No personal visits.
The Terms of Reference for the Readers' Editor are on www.thehindu.com
118) Need for caution on fertilizers
Armed with Cabinet approval, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee seem all set to introduce the new nutrient-based subsidy (NBS) policy for fertilizer pricing in the Union Budget to be presented on February 26. The move has generated controversy with the Left parties attacking it as anti-farmer and even parties within the United Progressive Alliance government such as the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam expressing reservations about the impact of the new policy on the farm gate price for fertilizers. If the sole purpose behind the NBS policy was to promote the balanced use of different nutrients like nitrogen, potash, phosphorous, and sulphur, there would be no reason for anyone to object. The excessive use of urea, for example, has pushed nitrogen in the soil to a high level in many parts of India, affecting crop production. That certain nutrients are used indiscriminately because of price despite their inappropriateness for particular crops, soil and local ecologies is a problem that needs to be addressed, in part, by the revival of agricultural extension services that were one of the first casualties of the reforms process two decades ago. But the proposed fertilizer subsidy scheme stems from another impulse: the desire to decontrol prices.
While assurances have been sought, and reportedly received, from the fertilizer industry that the price line would be maintained around the current level during the 2010 kharif season, there are sound reasons to worry about what will happen to fertilizer prices thereafter. The squeeze on India's farmers began way back in 1991 when Finance Minister Manmohan Singh first began to reduce the fertilizer subsidy. As input prices increased, farmers, especially those with marginal, small, and medium holdings, reduced their fertilizer consumption with detrimental effects upon yields. The price mismatch across different nutrients further complicated the picture. The NBS policy might make all fertilizers available at uniform rates, thus allowing the farmer to choose what is best for his land without worrying about opportunity cost. But if overall prices start rising, farmers are likely to cut back. That this is more than likely to happen is clear from the reaction of the industry. From the retention price system of the 1970s to the price system prevailing now, fertilizer companies have been clear that the only way they can realise their “full potential” is by full decontrol. Short of that, the industry was lobbying for a nutrient-based fixed subsidy alongside the freedom to set the maximum retail prices (MRPs). The UPA's new policy is in line with this wish.
119) Focussing on fiscal consolidation
The Prime Minister's Economic Advisory Council's Review of the Economy 2009-10, coming as it does just a few days before the Union Budget, is particularly significant this year. The EAC has brought up to date the major macroeconomic trends, a task that will be carried forward by the Economic Survey and the budget. While sharing its growing optimism with other official as well as non-official agencies , the EAC has entered certain caveats. Significantly, in projecting the economic growth, it has sharply revised upwards its October forecast of 6.5 per cent, pegging the rate at 7.2 per cent with an upward bias and thereby endorsing the CSO's advance estimates. The EAC is not alone in marking up the growth forecasts since the beginning of the year. The Reserve Bank of India, in its review of the third quarter, had estimated a growth rate of 7.5 per cent, sharply higher than its own earlier forecast of 6 per cent. The mid-year Economic Survey had said that the economy will grow by 7.75 per cent. Even if the optimism is justified and the economy actually grows at around 7.5 per cent, it would still be below the 9 per cent-plus growth recorded in the three years beginning 2005-06. It is, however, clear the economy is surely on its way back to a higher trajectory. The EAC expects the economic growth to touch 8.2 per cent in 2010-11 and 9 per cent the next year.
The two principal worries are inflation and the “unsustainable” fiscal situation. While concurring with the RBI's projection of 8.5 per cent WPI inflation, the EAC assesses that the high food inflation now hovering over 18 per cent could spill over to other sectors if corrective steps are not taken immediately. They include timely release of food grains for the public distribution system and import of essential commodities that are in short supply. Holding that the large revenue and fiscal deficits recorded over the last two years cannot be allowed to continue despite their proven counter-cyclical effects, the EAC wants the fiscal consolidation to be attempted without in any way affecting the stimulus aspect. With adequate fiscal adjustment, it would not be difficult to reduce the Centre's fiscal deficit by one to 1.5 per cent of the GDP in 2010-11. Disinvestment and spectrum auctions will boost revenues by 0.8 per cent. There is little scope for compressing capital expenditure while effecting fiscal correction. Infrastructure spending remains critical. Correctives must focus more on expenditure management since much of the fiscal expansion is attributable to increases in expenditure rather than tax cuts.
120) A project to secure autonomy and excellence
N.R. Madhava Menon
The National Commission on Higher Education and Research Bill aims, in letter and in spirit, to secure the true autonomy of universities and institutions of higher learning.
The Member-Secretary of the Kerala State Higher Education Council, in an article published in these columns on February 6, 2010 on the draft National Commission on Higher Education and Research (NCHER) Bill, argued that the Bill “does not allot appropriate levels of autonomy to States and universities, and in the process violates the principles of federalism and autonomy in the governance of higher educational institutions”. As one associated with the Task Force which prepared the Draft Bill, I felt that the article was written either without a proper understanding of its provisions, or with a motive to prejudice the public mind against true autonomy of higher academic institutions.
The author also invoked the concept of federalism to attack the Bill, presumably to say that the Union, without competence to legislate on the subject, is attempting to take away the States' authority. Is it his case that the Acts in respect of the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) which the NCHER is to replace, were also passed by Parliament without constitutional authority? What does he make of Entries 63 to 66 of the Union List and Entry 25 of the Concurrent List in this regard? If the argument is for consultations with States before a law affecting the States and the Union is adopted, that precisely is what the Union government is doing by putting the draft Bill in the public domain and asking the Task Force to visit each State to gather views and comments from the stakeholders. Of course, based on such feedback, the Bill may undergo changes before it is submitted to Parliament for consideration.
Reforming higher education is the common interest of the Union and the States and there is no room for dispute in this regard. The Yash Pal Committee recommended that the key reform needed is restoring the autonomy of universities (not the autonomy of the State governments, which is the function of the Constitution) by avoiding multiple regulators and preventing politicisation of university administration. Autonomy of universities involves autonomy from Central and State governments as well.
The Preamble of the NCHER Bill says it is an “Act to promote the autonomy of higher education institutions for the free pursuit of knowledge and innovation, and for facilitating access, inclusion and opportunities to all… and to provide for an advisory mechanism of eminent peers in academia.” One would expect critics to give reasoned arguments on how the provisions of the Bill contradict these objectives, or in what manner it could be better achieved.
Centralisation
The attempt to unify the multiple regulators and standardise the norms and procedures in a transparent manner is interpreted by the author of that article as centralisation of powers. Yes, the Bill seeks to vest the standard-setting and policy-planning functions in the NCHER. However, the delivery of educational services is a decentralised activity at the institutional level, and the NCHER plays only a facilitatory role in it. It is therefore wrong to say that an “authoritarian system” is being put in place.
Entrusting education in the hands of educationists is what is proposed. In this, they have to function democratically under legislative mandate and on the advice of acknowledged experts in different fields of knowledge. The NCHER cannot be seen as a “benevolent dictator” under the provisions of the draft Bill, as it is to function through various bodies set up with educationists in different branches of knowledge. Its functioning is to be reviewed once every five years and it is to report annually to the President or the Governor on the state of higher education in the country or State as the case may be.
Collegium
The Collegium of Scholars and learned men is indeed an innovation proposed for advising reform on the structure and content of higher education. They are to be Nobel Laureates, Fellows on learned societies of international repute, Jnanpith Award winners and people of similar distinction. Respecting the federal and democratic principle, the Bill seeks to have nominees of States also in the Collegium. Utilising the expertise and experience of learned men and women settled within and outside the country to promote standards of higher education is the intended objective of the Collegium proposal. If there are suggestions on how the objective can be achieved by changing the composition and constitution of the Collegium, these are to be welcomed. It is an idea with a purpose. It is not intended to give a subordinate status to the nominated members, though the core members are expected to serve the Collegium for a longer period for obvious reasons. All Collegium members serve in an honorary capacity without having to be present physically at one place.
The States and Union Territories have their nominees in the Collegium. The nominees are also expected to be educationists or eminent persons of equivalent status. The core members are not the nominees of the Union government. They are there by virtue of their accomplishments in higher education and research and are invited because of their expertise, experience and status in higher education. If it is desirable to limit the term of the core members also, it can be recommended on the basis of cogent reasons. It is the anxiety to keep the government out in constituting the Collegium that led the Task Force to recommend the method of inviting persons on the basis of their accomplishments in education and research. It is not to be seen as an assault on federalism or democracy. It is the concern for the autonomy of the institution that elections or nominations in the usual course cannot accomplish. Leaving the Union or State governments to “nominate experts of their choice,” as contended in the article, may not serve the objective for which the Collegium is put in place. The Collegium members are not to be government employees; nor can it be assumed that they would agree to become members of the Commission, as suggested in the article.
The State governments' power to set up universities will not be taken away or eroded by the NCHER. As it happens today with the UGC and the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC), the authority to accredit universities, determine standards and finance them will be regulated by the new Commission. Academic clearance is not to be given by the Commission on its own. Accreditation is to be done by an independent accreditation agency recognised under law on the basis of credible evidence gathered according to objective parameters. Towards this end, the NCHER may authorise the academic operations of new universities on the basis of norms and standards set for the purpose. How does the authority of the AICTE or the Medical Council of India (MCI) or the Bar Council of India (BCI) to accredit institutions erode the States' authority to set up universities, as argued in the article?
Vice-Chancellors
An innovative measure to secure academic autonomy that is proposed in the Bill relates to the selection of Vice-Chancellors. Many ills of higher education, at present, can be traced to corruption and manipulation involved in the appointment of Vice-Chancellors. The Bill empowers the Collegium to prepare a registry of suitable persons with expertise and experience after a worldwide search and to keep it updated from time to time. It is not necessary that only persons who figure in the registry be appointed. Whenever the Central or State governments want to appoint Vice-Chancellors they can ask, if they so like, for a panel of names from the Commission as per their requirements, and the Commission may provide it. This is to facilitate the search and to present available candidates of distinction within and outside the country. There is no infringement of autonomy in the process; rather, it enhances autonomy by removing potential risks to such autonomy. The States' choice of the person and the right to choose one from outside the registry is in no way compromised by the provisions in the Bill.
Let there be no confusion or misunderstanding that the Bill, in letter and in spirit, aims to secure the true autonomy of universities and institutions of higher learning. The autonomy proposed will, hopefully, percolate down to each department and each member of the faculty so that teaching and research tend to innovate, experiment and compete for academic excellence and inclusive development. Looked at from this perspective, the NCHER Bill provides a framework and a strategy for securing autonomy of academic institutions and providing an environment for competitive excellence in higher education.
( Professor N.R. Madhava Menon was a Member of the Yash Pal Committee and of the Task Force which drafted the NCHER Bill.)
121) What is happening in Pakistan?
K. Subrahmanyam
There are underlying worries whether in exchange for cooperation in fighting the Afghan Taliban and the other terrorist groups Pakistan would have obtained U.S. and NATO promises to get their mediatory intervention on the Kashmir issue.
First came the news of the arrest of the commander of the Afghan Taliban, Mullah Baradar, in Karachi, said to be in a joint operation of the Inter-Services Intelligence of Pakistan (ISI) and U.S. agencies. Though the arrest was made on February 8/9, the information became public only on February 15/16. He was reported to be under joint interrogation of the agencies of the two countries. Though this information was first denied by the Interior Minister Rehman Malik confirmation later came from the ISI's spokesman and subsequently from the Foreign Minister, Makhdoom Shah Mahmood Qureshi. He said the action was not under pressure from allies but in Pakistan's own national interest. Now it is reported that 124 terrorist suspects have been arrested in Pakistan, including five senior members of the Taliban Supreme command and nine militants with close links to Al Qaeda. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Senator John Kerry have praised the new cooperation between the Pakistan Army and Intelligence and the U.S. So has the U.S. Special envoy to the Af-Pak area, Richard Holbrooke, who was visiting Pakistan. Mullah Baradar was earlier considered to be a key person in the negotiations between the Taliban and the Karzai regime.
Some observers have described these developments as Pakistani moves to gain the goodwill of the U.S. and NATO to ensure that Pakistan will have its way in Afghanistan after the U.S. withdrawal in 2011. Others think that these actions place Pakistan in an advantageous position to facilitate negotiations between the Karzai government and the reconcilable Taliban as per the strategy formulated in the London conference. As is to be expected, in Delhi the main focus is on what it would mean for India and how Pakistan would use these developments against India. There are underlying worries over whether in exchange for cooperation in fighting the Afghan Taliban and the other terrorist groups Pakistan would have obtained U.S. and NATO promises to get their mediatory intervention on the Kashmir issue. Further concerns are, relying on the U.S. gratitude for action against some of the jehadi groups whether Pakistan may carry out more terroristic attacks on India and hope for the U.S. and NATO putting pressure on India not to retaliate. The Indian fears have very valid bases and the Indian agencies have to assess the consequences arising from the latest developments for India carefully and initiate steps for optimum preparedness to meet such contingent threats.
Need for objective assessment
At the same time it is very essential for the Indian intelligence community to carry out an objective assessment of the measures reported to have been initiated by Pakistan against the Afghan Taliban and the Al Qaeda. How far are they genuine? It should not be forgotten that Pakistan claimed to join the U.S. in the war against Taliban in October 2001 and in reality ensured that the leaderships of Taliban and Al Qaeda, significant numbers of their cadres as well as the Pakistani Army and ISI personnel serving the Taliban regime were rescued from the forces of the Northern Alliance and were brought to safety in Pakistan.
During the Afghan war in the 1980s, the Pakistan Army and the ISI, acting as the sole conduit for U.S. aid to the mujahideen, appropriated the bulk of the aid and armaments to themselves and to their favoured jehadi groups which later transformed themselves into the Taliban, the Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Al Qaeda and other anti-western jehadi groups. Therefore the Pakistani claims and actions cannot be taken at face value. Even among the U.S. observers there is considerable scepticism about the Pakistani actions. This present change in strategy is being handled at a very low key and the arrests of Mullah Baradar allegedly in collaboration with U.S. agencies has not produced the anti-U.S. outbursts to be expected from the anti-U.S. popular opinion in Pakistan. Obviously the army's guidance in shaping public opinion is at play.
An objective assessment will call for a careful calculation of the risks and benefits the Pakistani Army leadership should have taken into account in this switch of strategy, if it is genuine. On February 2, 2010 the Director of National Intelligence told the Senate, “Islamabad's conviction that militant groups are an important part of its strategic arsenal to counter India's military and economic advantages will continue to limit Pakistan's incentive to pursue an across-the-board effort against extremism,… Islamabad has maintained relationships with other Taliban-associated groups that support and conduct operations against U.S. and ISAF [International Security Assistance Force] forces in Afghanistan,…. It has continued to provide support to its militant proxies, such as the Haqqani Taliban, Gul Bahadur group, and Commander Nazir group…..The Al Qaeda, Afghan Taliban, and Pakistani militant safe haven in Quetta, will continue to enable the Afghan insurgents and Al Qaeda to plan operations, direct propaganda, recruiting and training activities, and fundraising activities with relative impunity.” There was no hint in the report that Pakistan could even modify its strategy in the very near future under certain circumstances. The arrest of five members of Quetta Shura tends to contradict the thesis that Baradar was arrested as he was for reconciliation.
Mullah Baradar's Taliban is offering stiff resistance to the U.S.-U.K. forces at Marjah in Helmand province of Southern Afghanistan. Mullah Baradar's “flowers” (inertial explosive devices) are proving formidable obstacles to the U.S.-U.K. advance. Is there no expectation of the Afghan Taliban's resentment being expressed against Pakistani cities and Army targets? In the absence of the central leadership how will various Afghan Taliban groups with conditioned jehadi suicide bombers at their disposal respond to the alleged betrayal of the Pakistani Army of a trusted ally? If there is no significant response to this betrayal in Pakistani territory from the Afghan Taliban cadres, is it not likely the Taliban within Afghanistan will become more reconcilable without any good offices from the Pakistan Army, and will not the task of the U.S. and the ISAF become that much easier?
Existential war
If, on the other hand, there is large-scale resentment over the Pakistani betrayal, the Pakistani Army and security services will have a whole-time task on their hands in dealing with that resentment expressed through terrorist acts, as has become the normal practice of such jehadi groups. These considerations apply in equal measure to Al Qaeda also since some of its members are also reported to have been arrested.
No doubt this is an existential war for the sovereignty and security of Pakistan and the application of a combination of surgery, radiation and chemotherapy to the cancer of religious extremism eating into the vitals of Pakistan may have become inescapable at this late stage as had been stressed by President Obama. While scepticism of the Pakistani Army's new strategy is entirely justified one should not overlook the possibility of their launching on a new strategy fully overconfident of their capabilities to prevail, as they did in 1965, 1971 and 1999 and coming to grief. Their bona fides are likely to come under test as Mr. Obama insists on his aims in his just war to dismantle, disrupt and defeat the ‘holy warriors' on Pakistani soil, the main battlefield.
122) Policing thought, not controlling terror
Siddharth Varadarajan
The Home Ministry's policy on visas for foreign scholars attending conferences in India is just as bone-headed as its recent restrictions on the entry of tourists and non-resident Indians.
As Union home minister P. Chidambaram grapples with the new architecture for counter-terrorism that he says India desperately needs, here's a suggestion he ought to consider: Dismantle the Department of Bad Ideas. Never heard of it? This is the section of his ministry which recommended that preventing foreign tourists and non-resident Indians from visiting India twice in a two month period would somehow protect the country from the likes of David Headley. That the alleged American terrorist travelled here to and from Pakistan multiple times on a business visa — for which the new restrictions do not apply — is a matter of detail the Ministry of Home Affairs seems to have overlooked.
One month on, the geniuses in Bad Ideas have struck again. Scholars from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, China, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Sudan, as well as scholars from any country who are of Pakistani origin, they reminded us last week, will no longer be given visas to attend conferences, seminars and workshops in India unless the MHA grants them “security clearance” in advance.
Security vetting
This is what the security guidelines, first framed in 1999 during the paranoid days of the BJP-led Vajpayee government and amended thrice since then, state. Any event that is either (i) on a subject which is political, semi-political, religious, communal or linked to human rights, or which has a bearing on external relations or national security, or (ii) is to be held in an area requiring an inner line or restricted area permit regardless of subject, or (iii) is to be attended by scholars from the eight red-flagged countries, must be referred to the MHA for “security clearance” at least six weeks before its commencement date. As the MHA stated in a recent press release, the lengthy timeline is needed to “ensure that security clearance for the event and for the participants could be suitably assessed … Security vetting is a time-consuming process”.
Now why is this a bone-headed idea from the security standpoint? Consider the example of a Sri Lankan professor at a small college in Kandy who plans to use an invitation to present a paper at a Pune University conference on food technology to plan an act of terror in India. In Mr. Chidambaram's fantasy world, the university would apply for clearance from the MHA, whose procedure for “security vetting” is so good that it would uncover the professor's terrorist proclivities and deny him a visa. So far so good. But guess what? If the same professor were to simply apply for a tourist visa, he would get it without any security vetting!
It is one thing for Mr. Chidambaram to be wary of visitors from these eight countries but why does he believe scholars are potentially more dangerous than their less educated compatriots and, therefore, in need of “security vetting”? In fact, it is not just scholars from the red-flagged eight who worry North Block but academics from anywhere in the world who may be invited to speak on a “political”, “semi-political”, religious, “communal” or human-rights related subject. Were the recent Nobel-prize winning NRI chemist, Venkatraman Ramakrishnan, to be invited to give a talk on the relationship between chemistry and the Vedas, for example, he would require “security clearance” from the Home Ministry.
Security vetting for scholars is only the most restrictive hurdle that academic institutions need to surmount but there are a raft of other clearances that all conferences with foreign speakers must secure. And it doesn't require a Nobel prize to guess that what the MHA is concerned about is not “security” but ideas and thought.
According to the “liberalized” overall “Guidelines for organisers of international conferences, seminars, workshops etc. being held in India' — issued by the ministry in 2000 and still in force today — official clearance from a “nodal ministry” is needed to invite foreign scholars and experts for any event “where substantive discussions/deliberations/interaction and exchange of thoughts and ideas will take place on a specific subject matter.” The nodal ministry will then decide whether to permit the event or refer it on to the MHA if any of the three conditions cited above are triggered.
Business and corporate meetings with foreign participants are excluded from the purview of visa restrictions, as are sporting and cultural events. But what is striking about the ministry's guidelines is the attempt to regulate and control every branch of learning. Thus, the rules say that the organizers of an academic event involving foreign scholars must first approach their “nodal/administrative ministry” — defined as that ministry of the Government of India “which is dealing/regulating framing rules etc. in respect of subject matter chosen for the event”. Now a conference on education can be referred to the Ministry of Human Resource Development but one wonders which ministry the organizers of an international conference on the hermeneutics of Gadamer would have to go to in order to get “clearance” for their event, or one on emergence of nationalism in 19th century Europe! Presumably knowledge isn't knowledge if our omniscient babus are not framing rules for it. A scholar can't be a scholar if she or he has no “nodal ministry”.
At the heart of the home ministry's guidelines on conference visas is the fear of knowledge, ideas, discussion and scholarship. And this in a government headed by a former professor of economics. Which brings me back to the visa rules for tourists announced last month. Another Very Well Known economics professor recently told a very, very important person about the difficulty some equally eminent friends of his were experiencing getting a visa for India because of the new mandatory two month ‘cooling off period' ‘between visits. The VVIP apologized and indicated that a top official in the Ministry of External Affairs could intervene on their behalf. But surely India has more pressing tasks for its top officials than getting foolish restrictions waived, the professor is said to have replied.
Sadly, all appeals to reason and logic and all attempts to shame have failed as far as the two month rule is concerned. Meanwhile, the travel horror stories multiply. An NRI groom had to turn back from Delhi airport unmarried because he had visited India just a few weeks earlier. A U.S.-based techie who used to visit his ageing mother in Bangalore on his way to and from Singapore can no longer do so. A British couple who left their luggage in a Mumbai hotel and flew to Colombo for an extended holiday were unable to come back to claim their bags. The world-renowned African-American scholar, Henry Louis Gates Jr. of Harvard, couldn't get a visa for the Jaipur Literary Festival in January because he could produce neither his birth certificate nor his 10th grade marksheet — apparently the only documents the Indian consulate in New York is willing to accept as proof that he was not really of Pakistani origin!
Needless to say, none of the mindless restrictions the MHA has imposed will help prevent terrorists from coming to India. Most will come without a visa; the others will have the ingenuity to come up with all the required paperwork. As for genuine tourists and scholars – who care for and love India — many will be scared off while those who brave the absurdity of our rules will be resentful. The organizers of academic events would rather plan their conferences and workshops in Sri Lanka, Nepal or perhaps even Malaysia or Singapore, confident that they would face less restrictions on what they can or cannot discuss than they would in India.
123) Iceland's thaw point over press freedom
Ben Quinn
Free speech campaigners were cheered by plans put before Iceland's parliament last week to reinvent the island nation as a “journalism haven” for those fleeing stringent libel laws elsewhere.
But news of the development overlooked one rather depressing local factor — the widespread collapse of trust in much of Iceland's national media.
Many regard the country's main newspapers as mouthpieces for the partisan political interests that failed to prevent last year's economic collapse.
A particular focus of contempt is Morgunbladid, the oldest established daily. Since last year, its editor-in-chief has been David Oddsson, Iceland's Prime Minister during 13 years of light-touch regulation and privatisation, and the man later in charge of the Central Bank when the collapse finally occurred.
Mr. Oddsson's arrival coincided with mass lay-offs of experienced journalists, while critics accused him of using the paper to rewrite history after quotation marks appeared around the word “collapse.” Morgunbladid has also been a fervent opponent of the deal for the repayment of money owed to Britain and Holland from the collapse of the Icesave online bank.
Investigative journalism and criticism of the establishment aren't dead yet, though. Away from the big two national dailies, some of the most impressive recent scoops have been down to DV, the nearest thing Iceland has to a downmarket tabloid.
A major upsurge in blogging has also occurred although perhaps this isn't surprising given the role social networking sites played in last year's “saucepan revolution.” Blogs range from the English language Icelandweatherreport.com to one written by Iceland's best-known political commentator, Egill Helgason, famed for his lack of deference.
Indeed, he provided a reminder of the power of the media to stir things up when, on his influential weekly talk show, he asked the sleaze-busting French magistrate Eva Joly if she would be willing to “help” Iceland. Just days later, the government followed up by bringing Joly on board as an adviser to an official investigation into Iceland's discredited financial oligarchs. — © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
124) UAE quality of life ranked top
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has been ranked as the country with the best quality of life in the Middle East and North African region, a local business journal reported on Sunday.
The Gulf nation has been globally ranked as the 15th best in the world, out of 160 countries or regions evaluated, Arabian Business said, citing the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU)'s 2009 Quality of Life Index.
The ranking is a reflection of the prosperity enjoyed by the UAE over the past years and the result of ongoing strategic initiatives proposed by the government across all sectors, including economy, security, health and education, the report said.
The UAE's ranking was based on its impressive civic development and administration and high GDP growth, as well as family and healthcare services, life expectancy and safety and security, it added.
The government's development plans have also significantly improved the country's ranking in several international reports and indexes across different areas, such as competitiveness, economic and international investment, tourism and security, reflecting an upwards trend in the UAE's competitiveness and quality of life, the report said.
“Being ranked number one in the Middle East and North Africa by the EIU is an achievement we are proud of, but our goal is to be on par with the best countries in the world,” Abdullah Nasser Lootah, secretary general of Emirates Competitiveness Council, was quoted as saying.
The EIU, part of the London-based Economist Group, a group of companies that sell publications and services under The Economist brand, is a research and advisory firm providing country, industry and management analysis worldwide.
The EIU's Quality of Life Index relates subjective life satisfaction surveys to objective determinants of the quality of life across 160 countries or regions, according to Arabian Business. — Xinhua
125) Trying to change
At the Bharatiya Janata Party's National Council meet at Indore, the new man in, Nitin Gadkari, scored high on style quotient. Summing up the mood were the lyrics from an old Bollywood song to which he swayed: life is a puzzle; it makes you cry and it makes you laugh. With two defeats in succession, the BJP has lately had more occasions to cry than laugh, and it was clear to those who watched the proceedings that Mr. Gadkari — his easy, genteel manner notwithstanding — was not about to let the drift continue. In his addresses, the BJP chief touched upon a multiplicity of issues: indiscipline in party ranks; the trend in the upper echelons towards ostentation and personal ambition; the need to widen the party's catchment area by roping in the poor, especially Dalits; and of course, the mandatory doffing of the hat to Ayodhya and the Ram Mandir. Mr. Gadkari set himself apart in other ways too, plainly telling partypersons not to touch his feet or flatter him in the hope of easy rewards.
For the BJP, Mr. Gadkari is its first bit of good news in a long time. Whatever the impact of his plain speaking on the party's squabbling second-rung leadership, it is a fair bet that the rank and file will welcome the shift towards commitment and hard work. Yet his objectives are easier outlined than achieved. Personal ambition and factionalism have taken deep root in a party once known for its difference but now self-avowedly revelling in “seven-star” culture. Nor can an innately exclusivist party suddenly train itself to embrace a broad-based, inclusive agenda. Mr. Gadkari's own words illustrate the inherent difficulty of achieving this transition. The BJP chief pleaded with the Muslim community to voluntarily hand over the Ram Mandir site to Hindus and, in the same breath, decried the “appeasement” of Muslims. A spokesperson's clarification that the reference was to the Congress general secretary, Digvijay Singh visiting alleged terrorists in Azamgarh in Uttar Pradesh made the meaning worse. It implied that visiting alleged terrorists amounted to appeasing Muslims. In setting a broader agenda for the BJP, Mr. Gadkari is simply trying to make a virtue of necessity. In truth, the BJP is in dire straits. Its May 2009 general election performance was its worst in two decades. The party's allies have deserted it and its equations with those that remain, including the trusted Shiv Sena, are shaky. And while Mr. Gadkari may have taken potshots at the Gandhi dynasty, he ought to know that that function is fulfilled in the BJP by its mentor in Jhandewalan.
126) Fingerprinting history
Even ancient history does not stand still. Many of history's secrets lie locked inside the human genome. DNA studies have revealed patterns of early human migration around the world. They have shown that all of us probably descended some 60,000 years ago from a group of ancestors in what is now Ethiopia. In 1998, genetic tests on the descendants of Thomas Jefferson, the third President of the United States, and Sally Hemings, a slave in his household, showed (alongside other evidence) that he is likely to have fathered at least one of her children. Now, and rather more dramatically, a battery of tests on 11 Egyptian mummies, including analysis of DNA samples and CT scans, has thrown up a fascinating body of evidence about the life and paternity of Ancient Egypt's best-known king — Tutankhamen (1351-1334 BC). The findings may disappoint some mystery writers and others who speculated about the boy Pharaoh's medical condition and end. The groundbreaking study, led by Zahi Hawass of Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities, shows that King Tut's death at the age of 19 was probably a result of malaria (complicated by a degenerative bone condition) and not murder. His death has been a subject of feverish speculation after X-rays of his skull in the late 1960s revealed a fracture (now known to be caused by the process of mummification). Various scholars, going on the basis of artefacts portraying him in an androgynous manner, speculated he could have died from a slew of rare illnesses, including Marfan syndrome.
The main objective of the study by Hawass et al — the results of which are published in the February 17, 2010 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association — was to determine the “familial relationship of the 11 mummies,” including that of Tut, and to search for “pathological features attributable to possible murder, consanguinity, inherited disorders, and infectious diseases.” Genetic fingerprinting has established a plausible pedigree that spans five generations. The study suggests his parents were the ‘heretic' Pharaoh Akhenaten and one of his sisters, his great grandparents were Yuva and Thuya, and the two stillborn foetuses found in his tomb were likely to be his children. Tut was a relatively minor Pharaoh in ancient Egypt's history. His present fame is linked to the wonderful treasures retrieved from his tomb, which was discovered by archaeologist Howard Carter in 1922. Yet it was under the rule of Tut, aided by powerful advisers such as Ay, that the traditional priesthoods and gods, banished under the iconoclastic Akhenaten, were restored. What we have just learnt about King Tut and his kin is a demonstration of the awesome power of science to rediscover our past.
127) Was Indian nationalism inclusive?
K.N. Panikkar
One of the weaknesses of the national movement was that it did not have an effective programme to ensure the inclusion of the depressed and socially excluded classes into the nation.
Inclusiveness is the catchword in the current political and economic discourse, following the 11th Plan prescription to incorporate those who have remained outside the margins into the mainstream of development. This is a confession of the failure of democratic governance, on the one hand, and of caste-class partisanship in the process of nation building, on the other. It also testifies that a substantial section has not yet come under the ‘benevolent' umbrella of the nation. In a highly differentiated society, inclusiveness is indeed a process which takes place in three ways: politically through common struggles, socially by overcoming internal social barriers and culturally by identifying a common past by invoking indigenous cultural consciousness.
The attempt at inclusiveness is riven with internal contradictions, which account for the complexity, weaknesses and limitations of the inclusive process and tensions within nationalism. The concept of nationalism, in the Indian colonial context, becomes meaningful only when looked at beyond the overarching relationship between colonialism and the people, and the mutual relationship among different segments of society is taken into account. Overcoming these differences was integral to nationalism.
Inclusiveness, therefore, is a necessary strategy of nationalism, even with contradictory interests finding a place in it. The attempts to resolve the secondary contradiction within the umbrella of nationalism do not overlook the primary contradiction with colonialism. In this sense, the aim of nationalism was not limited to the attainment of freedom but, as Gandhiji envisaged, had to lead to the creation of a qualitatively different society, devoid of caste and religious antagonism. To a deputation of students in 1934, Gandhiji said: “The two things — the social reordering and the fight for political swaraj — must go hand in hand. There can be no question of precedence or division into watertight compartments here.” Nationalism was thus conceived as a combination of political freedom and social emancipation.
What nationalism sought to achieve was togetherness. The very first session of the Indian National Congress recognised it by identifying its purpose as providing a platform for people to come together. What brought people together were political struggles and public agitations. The various streams within the movement with different strategies and modes of struggles were efforts to ensure their rightful inclusion in the nation. People, however, consisted of diverse groups, castes, classes and religions with widely differing interests. What was conceived as nationalism, therefore, was bringing the people together, regardless of the differentiations. Although the anti-colonial sentiment ironed out some of these differences and interests, they were so diverse and sharp that the national movement, functioning within a liberal framework, was not able to find an effective solution. Therefore, India emerged not only impoverished due to colonial exploitation but also socially divided.
That India was economically backward was not surprising, but the fact that nationalism did not succeed in ushering in social and cultural solidarity left a deep scar. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, architect of the Constitution, underlined this failure in 1949: “We must make our political democracy a social democracy as well. Political democracy cannot last unless there lies at the base of it social democracy… What does social democracy mean? It means a way of life which recognises liberty, equality and fraternity as the principle of life … On the 26th of January 1950 we are going to enter into a life of contradiction. In politics we will have equality and in social and economic life, we will have inequality.” While pointing out the political success of the movement by which ‘people' became members of a nation-state with democratic rights, Dr. Ambedkar was conscious that nationalism did not succeed in creating inclusiveness in the social, cultural and economic domains.
The roots of this failure can be traced to the early phase of national awakening, which suffered from a disjunction between political and socio-cultural struggles. To begin with, the renaissance which prepared the ground for the emergence of nationalism dissociated itself from political problems and, therefore, was unable to provide a critique of colonialism which warped the nature of Indian modernity. Most of the early renaissance leaders idealised development in the West. Hence, their ability to envision an alternative was limited. Later on, the national movement attributed primacy to political struggles, despite Gandhiji's constructive programme and untouchability campaign. Although both he and Tagore advocated the importance of cultural politics, the national movement concentrated its energies on political mobilisation.
Despite these early limitations, the importance of incorporating the marginalised sections and thus creating an inclusive society was on the agenda of nationalism. The different political formations which participated in anti-colonial struggles with different programmes and different social base were engaged in incorporating different sections into the mainstream of national life through participation in the anti-colonial struggles. Even when contradictions existed among them, they were struggling for inclusiveness in the nation. The social and cultural inclusiveness was sought through socio-cultural emancipation, economic inclusiveness through class struggles and political inclusiveness through political mobilisation. These three engagements of the national movement cover the history of the liberation struggle which was not limited to a direct confrontation with colonialism, but also aimed at the modernisation and democratisation of society although with limited success.
A major concern of the national movement was social inclusiveness. The divisive and oppressive character of the Indian caste system was antithetical to the spirit of nationalism and it was quite natural that only social awakening could address this question. Gandhiji gave equal, if not greater, importance to social issues and cultural struggles. In Gandhian programme, therefore, abolition of untouchability occupied a central concern. The ashrams Gandhiji set up and lived in became a symbol of social equality and also meant a subversion of the traditional, unequal social system.
The national movement was quite conscious of the importance of inclusion of the traditionally deprived groups for the actual realisation of the nation and initiated steps in social, economic and cultural fields to create conditions conducive for them to identify their interest with the nation. In pursuance of that, a series of struggles was conducted covering social, cultural and economic lives. Each one of them had the effect of creating a community, eventually forming a part of the nation. Although these struggles increased their social consciousness, none of them was sufficiently effective to transform the life conditions of the marginalised, possibly because these efforts were bridled by the interests of the ‘upper' castes and classes. The marginalised sections, could not, therefore, identify themselves with the nation. They were sceptical and distrustful.
The consequence of this marginality was the emergence of movements among the traditionally subordinated groups fighting to gain their rightful place in society. That happened in all parts of the country and among all depressed communities. Satyasodak Samaj in Maharashtra in the 19th century, the Dravida Kazhakam in Tamil Nadu, the Sadhu Jana Paripalana Sabha in Kerala and, indeed, the movement led by Dr. Ambedkar are some examples. Emerging out of the oppressed sections, they did not subscribe to the ‘upper' caste urge for reform, of either caste or religion, but stood for abolishing caste and superstitions based on religious sanction. In the vision of Dr. Ambedkar, the annihilation of caste was a necessary pre-requisite for social inclusiveness.
One of the weaknesses of the national movement was that it did not have an effective programme to ensure the inclusion of the depressed and socially excluded classes into the nation. Whatever was attempted in this field was very superficial inasmuch as it did not frontally contest the power of the ‘upper' castes and classes, the legacy of which continues even today. That anti-colonial Indian nationalism was not sufficiently inclusive is possibly one of the reasons why a substantial section of the population is still not a part of the nation.
The making of the Indian nation, as Surendranath Banerji envisioned, can be complete only when nationalism becomes inclusive on a democratic, secular and socialist foundation. In post-independent India, this has remained an unrealised dream. Given the capitalist hegemony over society and middle-class control over administration, the present urge for inclusion may yet end up as another popular slogan.
(Based on the Foundation Day lecture delivered at Assam Central University, Silchar. Author can be reached at knpanikkar@gmail.com)
128) ‘Price rise inevitable' – adding salt to the wounds
Brinda Karat
A comparison of the consumer price index of the G-20 group of countries in December 2009 shows that India has the highest annual consumer price inflation.
________________________________________
• The government has raised the price of petrol and diesel 10 times in the last six years
• Revenue mobilisation through high indirect taxes on petroleum products must be stopped
________________________________________
The President's Address makes the startling statement that “higher prices were inevitable.” This makes it clear that the United Progressive Alliance government has no intention of a course correction in the policies that have resulted in continuing high rates of inflation of food items, which reached almost 18 per cent (Wholesale Price Index) in the week ending January 31, 2010. The government has consistently refused to accept its own responsibilities and has sought to explain away high prices through fake alibis, one of them being that high inflation rates are a global phenomenon. A comparison of the consumer price index of the G-20 group of countries in December 2009 shows that India has the highest annual consumer price inflation at 14.97 per cent. Clearly, domestic, not international, factors are responsible.
Two sets of data available are a pointer to the differential impact of policy. The report of the U.N. Department of Economic and Social Affairs has assessed that in 2009, 13.6 million more people were pushed into the ranks of the poor in India because of joblessness and high rates of inflation. At the other end, the profits of 33 sugar companies (according to a calculation made by a national newspaper) showed a huge increase of 2,900 per cent from 30 crore rupees in 2008 to over 900 crore rupees in 2009, a record by any count.
The presidential address speaks approvingly of liberalised imports of sugar to tide over the shortage. It does not, however, provide any answers to why the government refused to build a sugar buffer stock when there was a bumper crop two years in a row till 2008. In fact, the government incentivised exports to the extent of Rs. 1,350 rupees a tonne of sugar from April 2007. The Maharashtra government added another subsidy of Rs. 1,000 a tonne. Considering that approximately five million tonnes of sugar was exported between 2007 and 2008 this would mean an export subsidy from the central government to sugar exporters of at least Rs. 675 crore. The subsidy from the Maharashtra government would also run into several hundred crores of rupees.
Exports were incentivised till December 2008 when an export ban was imposed. Once the shortages thus created started impacting on the higher prices of sugar in the market, the Central government incentivised imports by removing all duties, first on raw sugar and then on white refined sugar. There was no control on the prices importers charged from market sales. So money was made both ways by the powerful sugar lobbies, through exports and then through imports and sale in the open market at high prices. It is hardly surprising that the profit lines of sugar companies have soared while consumers have to pay exorbitant retail prices of nearly Rs. 40 to 50 rupees a kilo.
Earlier in an agenda note circulated at the meeting of Chief Ministers, the government mentioned the increase in “crude oil prices” as a contributory factor to food inflation. Hikes in prices of petroleum products do affect food prices and other essential commodities, but who is responsible? After peaking in mid-2008, international fuel prices have fallen sharply throughout 2009; from June-July 2008 they have fallen by over 100 per cent. Even though they have risen recently, the level is still far below the peak. The Central government's policies of frequent hikes in the prices of diesel and petrol have contributed to higher prices of food items. The UPA government has raised the price of petrol and diesel 10 times in the last six years, the last time in July 2009. The Kirit Parekh committee has recently recommended further substantial hikes and deregulation of the prices of petrol, diesel, and cooking gas. This will have a disastrous impact.
Linked to the issue of petrol and diesel prices are the excise duties and tax policies of the government. An impression is sought to be created that whereas the Central government is pro-people in its tax policies regarding essential commodities, it is the State governments that are imposing higher duties on fuel. The reality is somewhat different. Take for example the taxes on petrol and diesel. At present the crude oil price is $ 74 a barrel (160 litres). At the higher international price of crude oil, one litre of petrol would cost Rs. 21.46 rupees a litre and an additional 10 per cent for processing costs. So why should the Indian consumer pay almost double the price for a litre of petrol and Rs. 32 for a litre of diesel? This is because the Central government continues to maintain a high tax regime of central customs and excise duties.
For every rupee spent on petrol in Delhi, the cost of the fuel is 48.64 paise, central customs and excise duties comprise 34.69 paise whereas the State taxes are 16.67 paise. This can vary with different States but not substantially. So who is taxing the people more, the Centre or the States? The Central government must stop revenue mobilisation through high indirect taxes on petroleum products, particularly at a time when international prices are rising.
It is made out as though State governments were responsible for high prices of sugar because of the higher slabs of VAT on sugar, including imported sugar. However, 23 of the 32 States listed in the note have nil rate of VAT on imported sugar. Both West Bengal and Kerala have no taxes on imported sugar. On the other hand, Jharkhand under President's Rule had the highest VAT rate of 12.5 per cent, Congress governments in Rajasthan and Haryana and the DMK government in Tamil Nadu have 4 per cent VAT on imported sugar. A quick comparison made on the VAT rates on various food items (rice, green gram, chana dal, wheat, and salt) prevailing in Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, and West Bengal reveals that it is the Congress-led State governments that impose a higher burden on food items.
The agenda note does not mention the food security legislation although this was a categorical assurance made in the first presidential address when the present UPA government took office. On the contrary, it relies on the dubious underestimate of poverty by the Planning Commission from the present 6.52 crore families below the poverty line to 5.90 crore families, to make out a case that it has been generous in not cutting allocations, according to the reduced BPL (below the poverty line) numbers. It does not even bother to mention that two official committees, the Saxena Committee and the Tendulkar Committee, however inadequate and incomplete their reasoning may have been, have advised substantial increases in the numbers of BPL families.
Equally unfortunate, in spite of the protest from almost all States to the Central government's policy of cuts in allocations to APL (above the poverty line) families to the extent of 75 per cent over the last few years, the note does not accept the demand for restoration of allocations. On the contrary it continues to push for sales to the State governments at almost double the issue price of APL foodgrains, in the name of additional allocations. State governments refused to lift the high priced stocks as a result of which out of the additional allocation of 20 lakh tonnes, only 1.71 lakh tonnes were lifted. If the Central government allots such grain at APL prices, the State governments would immediately lift the stocks. At a time when the government is holding buffer stocks of around 20 million tonnes, well above the buffer stock norms, its refusal to provide foodgrains at cheap prices to strengthen the PDS is rooted in its strong ideological commitment to allow free rein to the market forces regardless of the consequences.
It is for this reason that the defence and justification of government policy in the President's Address only adds salt to the wounds.
( Brinda Karat is a member of the Polit Bureau of the CPI-M.)
‘Price rise inevitable' – adding salt to the wounds (The phrase is to "rub salt into the (or someone's) wound". The heading and text of an article had the expression ". adding/adds salt to the wounds" (Op-Ed, February 23, 2010). (It is not "rubbing salt" or "pouring salt on the wounds" either, as a reader suggests.)
129) How real is British outrage over “killer” passports?
Hasan Suroor
It was billed as the moment when, we were told, Britain would read out the riot act to Israel over Mossad's suspected link to the abuse of British passports by the killers of Hamas commander, Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, in Dubai last month.
But the first thing that the Israeli Ambassador Ron Prosor did as he emerged from a meeting with the Foreign Office chief Sir Peter Ricketts last Thursday was to clarify to waiting journalists that he had come in response to an “invitation” and not summons — making a pointed distinction between being “summoned” (as in the “Iranian envoy summoned for a dressing down”) and being simply called for a coffee.
The message Mr. Prosor wanted to get out — commentators noted — was that his meeting with Sir Peter was a routine diplomatic drill and there was no need to get too excited, or read too much into it. In other words, Britain was simply going “through the motions” to calm public opinion. A similar line was coming out of Israel where ministers were said to be “confident” that for all the tough talk Britain would “do nothing” to damage its “strategic” alliance with Israel.
“The U.K. is going through the motions of outrage, but our assessment is that they will do nothing,” The Daily Telegraph reported an Israeli government source as saying. The British government, clearly embarrassed first by the disclosure about the misuse of its passports and then by Israeli bid to play down its fallout, insists that it is taking the issue “very seriously” and has ordered an investigation by the Serious Organised Crime Agency. Foreign Secretary David Miliband described the theft of identities of six Israel-based British citizens and their use in the cold-blooded murder of Mahmoud as an “outrage.”
“We want to get to the bottom of the issue of the fraudulent passports,” he said.
He also sought to counter the impression given by Mr. Prosor that his meeting with Sir Patrick was just a fireside chat.
“Sir Peter made clear to Mr. Prosor how seriously we take any suggestion of the fraudulent use of British passports — he also explained the concern we have for British passport holders in Israel,'' he said adding that Britain expected Israel to cooperate with its investigations.
On the face of it, the British government appears to have hit all the right buttons to express its outrage and, in fact, there is speculation that it might even scrap its intelligence-sharing arrangement with Mossad if it is found to have been involved in the Dubai affair.
So, what's going on? Is British anger just a lot of hot air as Israelis seem to suggest? Or, is the anger real?
The cynical answer is that, actually, we'll never know simply because we'll never know the truth about Mossad's involvement. For, notwithstanding the Dubai police claim that they're “99 per cent” sure it was a Mossad operation, Israel alone knows the truth and nobody seriously believes that it is going to accept responsibility.
“Policy of ambiguity”
Nor is the British investigation likely to go far without Israel's active and honest cooperation. But Israel has already made clear that it should not be expected to answer any questions saying that it has a “policy of ambiguity” on intelligence matters, and firmly rejecting any suggestion of Mossad's involvement.
“There is no reason to think that it was the Israeli Mossad, and not some other intelligence service or country up to some mischief,” Israel's Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said.
This is not the first time that Mossad has been involved in a row over British passports. In the 1980s, its U.K. operations were shut down by the Margaret Thatcher government after its agents were caught with British passports. It then gave an undertaking of good behaviour in future, though as The Times recalled : “No one really believed that Mossad would honour its pledge.”
The Guardian pointed out that Mossad agents “routinely use…. forged western passports and when caught doing it Israel give assurances they will not do it again.”
“Evidently these diplomatic assurances are worthless,” it said branding the Dubai incident as a “breach of trust between two nations who are ostensibly allies.”
The government has been accused of acting in a “supine” manner in dealing with Israel. There have been allegations of a possible cover-up with media reports claiming that Britain had advance knowledge of a Mossad plot involving British passports. It has also been reported that Britain knew two weeks ago that British passports were used by the killers of Mr. Mabhouh but kept quiet.
Predictably, the Government has rejected such reports as “completely untrue” and “nonsense” but it is under growing pressure even from uber Israeli loyalists to take a tougher line. Talk to sceptics, though, and they are likely to tell you to go and brush up your history of British-Israeli relations before entertaining such thoughts.
130) Ministry guidelines on conference and tourist visas
Ashim Khurana, Joint Secretary (Foreigners), Ministry of Home Affairs, writes:
I invite attention to the article ‘Policing thought, not controlling terror' (Feb. 22, 2010). I am afraid that the report is based on considerable misunderstanding and does not reflect the position correctly.
Conference Visa
The guidelines on Conference Visas have been in place for quite some time. These guidelines were revisited through a process of Inter-Ministerial consultations with the stakeholder Ministries/Departments concerned and revised instructions were issued in July, 2009.
As per the revised guidelines, prior security clearance from MHA is required
• in respect of participants from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, China, Iran, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Iraq, Sudan, foreigners of Pakistani origin and Stateless persons;
• if the participation involves visit to restricted or protected areas in India or areas affected by terrorism, militancy and extremism, etc. viz. Jammu & Kashmir and North-Eastern States;
• if the conference involves politically and socially sensitive subjects.
The participants from other countries can obtain Conference Visas from the Indian Mission concerned on production of
(i) invitation letter from the organiser,
(ii) event clearance from the Ministry of Home Affairs,
(iii) administrative approval of the nodal Ministry,
(iv) political clearance from the Ministry of External Affairs and
(v) clearance from the State Government/UT concerned.
The above guidelines supersede all the previous instructions on the subject.
The fresh guidelines were put in place to streamline the procedure for grant of Conference Visas to bona fide participants. In the present scenario, security imperatives cannot be ignored. As security vetting is a comprehensive process to be performed within a prescribed time line, a period of six weeks has been prescribed to the organisers to submit the details of the proposals so as to ensure that the clearance from MHA is granted well in time for the event and for the participants so that they are not put to any undue hardship in making their travel plans to attend the conference.
The guidelines are intended to facilitate conferences, not to control free speech or thought.
Tourist Visa
The recent guidelines on Tourist Visas stipulating a gap of at least two months between two visits to the country on a Tourist Visa have been introduced with a view to curbing the abuse/misuse of Tourist Visa. This stipulation of two months gap does not apply to foreign nationals coming on any other type of visa. This also does not apply to people of Indian origin holding PIO and OCI Cards. In case a foreign national holding a Tourist Visa has to come to the country within the period of two months of his/her last departure due to any exigent situation, he/she may have to obtain special permission from the Mission/Post concerned after duly satisfying the Mission/Post about the exigency.
A provision has also been made for genuine tourists who have to re-enter India largely on account of neighbourhood tourism. In such cases, the Indian Missions/Posts abroad have been authorised to permit two or three entries, subject to submission of a detailed itinerary and supporting documentation (ticket bookings).
Furthermore, instructions have already been issued on 24.12.2009 authorising the Immigration authorities in all the Immigration Check Posts in the country to allow such foreign nationals on Tourist Visas arriving in India without the specific authorisation from the Indian Missions/Posts to make two or three entries into the country (need based), subject to production of an itinerary and supporting documentation (ticket bookings).
It has also been decided that in emergent cases involving re-entry of persons of Indian origin on Tourist Visa within sixty days, of their earlier departure from India, FRROs may exercise their discretion in allowing such passengers to enter into the country after being convinced of the genuineness of their visit.
Siddharth Varadarajan replies:
Mr. Ashim Khurana is right to say security imperatives cannot be ignored in the present scenario. But why does the visit of a scholar from Europe or America trigger “security imperatives” only when she or he comes for a conference on “politically and socially sensitive subjects” and not when she or he visits India as a tourist? Obviously because the government believes a security threat is posed not by the scholar as an individual but by the views she or he has on "sensitive" subjects, a term so elastic it could cover virtually any topic. As for scholars from the eight blacklisted countries, India issues the maximum tourist visas to Bangladeshis and it is not difficult for a Bangladeshi academic to visit India for tourism. What is it about a “conference” that prompts the MHA to insist on security clearance for the scholar? Clearly, the ministry believes the exchange of ideas with foreign scholars has “security” implications.That is why I said what is being policed here is thought.
As for the two-month cooling off period for foreign visitors — a decision triggered by David Headley's frequent visits to India on a business visa — Mr. Khurana himself admits the stipulation of a two months gap does not apply to foreign nationals coming on any type of visa other than a tourist visa.
Despite all the safeguards and exemptions he has listed, many bona fide tourists and persons of Indian origin not holding PIO/OCI cards have been denied entry because of the new rule. The rule has also deterred potential visitors. Given the expense involved, tourists and Indian-origin visitors want an assurance that they would be allowed in and are unlikely to have confidence in the display of “discretion” by immigration officials.
Corrections and Clarifications
• The last paragraph of a report “U.K.-Israel tensions grow” (“International” page, February 19, 2010) was “Britain is among the 11 European countries whose forged passports were used by Mahmoud's killers.” A reader said that it is “11 European suspects” and not countries. The writer clarifies that it is not 11 European suspects. The suspects' actual nationalities are not known. The 11-member hit squad used stolen identities of 11 European nationals. The correct thing would be to say that Britain is among the European countries whose passports were used by the 11 killers.
• A sentence in the sixth paragraph of an article “Where is the law to protect our children from sexual abuse?” (Op-Ed, February 19, 2010) was “Even if someone does get convicted under the IPC for rape, the maximum imprisonment is a mere two years.” Under Section 375 of the IPC, rape gets a punishment of not less than seven years but which may be for life or for a term which may extend to 10 years. The writer clarifies that it is true that for an offence of rape, the punishment could be up to a maximum of seven years. However, for the offence of outraging the modesty of a woman (considered less severe than rape) the maximum punishment is imprisonment for two years. The sentence should have referred to molestation rather than rape.
• A sentence in an item “Middle East situation” (“This Day That Age – From The Pages of The Hindu dated February 20, 1960”, February 20, 2010) was “Mr. Dag Hammarskjoeld, United Nations Secretary-General … attributed this to an atmosphere of mutual district which had touched off a chain reaction.” The word should have been “distrust”.
• The strapline and text of a report “Tiger sighting in new reserve” (February 20, 2010) said that the Parambikulam Wildlife Sanctuary in Kerala, was declared the country's 38th tiger reserve on Friday (February 19, 2010). Parambikulam is the 39 {+t} {+h} tiger reserve.
It is the policy of The Hindu to correct significant errors as soon as possible. Please specify the edition (place of publication), date and page.
The Readers' Editor's office can be contacted by
Telephone: +91-44-28418297/28576300 (11 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday to Friday);
Fax: +91-44-28552963;
E-mail: readerseditor@thehindu.co.in
Mail: Readers' Editor, The Hindu, Kasturi Buildings,
859 & 860 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002, India.
All communication must carry the full postal address and telephone number.
No personal visits.
The Terms of Reference for the Readers' Editor are on www.hindu.com
131) In deep crisis
India's national carrier, Air India, severely hit by financial crisis, still remains in the intensive care unit. Though the government has decided to infuse equity to an extent of Rs.800 crore, nothing seems to be going right for the National Aviation Company of India Limited, the new corporate entity created by merging Air India and Indian Airlines in 2007. For one thing, the process of merger is yet to be completed. Secondly, the losses are mounting month after month — currently Rs.400 crore a month, on average. A year after the formal merger, the losses had doubled to Rs.5,548 crore (2008-09). The airline is so badly strapped for cash that it needs Rs.1,000 crore more as working capital for just staying afloat and maintaining its services at the present level. Already, its working capital borrowings have piled up to Rs.16,000 crore, with the accumulated losses adding up to about Rs.7,000 crore. It appears that Air India is caught in a vicious circle. Wherever it turns to for assistance, it is required to come up with a road map for turning the company around. Given the airline's predicament where it cannot even pay for the fuel or clear the wage arrears of the staff, scaling up its operations — necessary for earning more revenue — is unthinkable in the absence of a lifeline.
At the Board of Directors' meeting last week, the proposal to hive off its strategic business units and make them independent, commercial entities was dropped from the agenda. So far, the company's efforts at raising funds have not borne fruit. It has to work out an actionable turnaround plan before the government can firm up, on the advice of the Group of Ministers concerned, further steps to resuscitate the airline. This means there has to be wide consultation involving the management, administrative staff, and trade unions to hammer out such a plan, whose components will include: rationalisation of wages and work force, discharge of debts, fleet expansion through induction of the latest aircraft, and an end to the culture of political interference in management. Air India has been calling for a level playing field in operations vis-Ã -vis private carriers. All these issues have been discussed intensely and at different levels in the past. But there has been no consensus on any of the issues that are critical for the viability of the airline. The government cannot be expected to keep pumping huge sums of money unless it is convinced that the airline has a comprehensive and practical plan of action for its revival. The bottom line should, of course, be the financial viability and sustainability of Air India. Time is running out, and the management must get its act together before it is too late.
132) Hair reveals our past
In less than 10 years after the human genome from a living individual was first sequenced, scientists have successfully sequenced a complete ancient human genome (only partial ancient human genomes and mitochondrial DNA have been sequenced in the past). The study was published recently in Nature . The sample studied was one of the four excellently preserved human tufts from a male paleo-Eskimo obtained from about 4,000-year-old permafrost at Qeqertasussuk, Greenland. As against the gold standard of sequencing the genome 10 times, the ancient human genome was sequenced 20 times over nearly 80 per cent of its length. Repeated sequencing helps enhance the level of accuracy, ensuring that any differences seen between ancient and modern human genomes are true. There is great interest in studying ancient humans to understand the routes of human migration from Africa. The ancient human's mitochondrial DNA sequenced in 2008 helped in identifying him as belonging to Saqqaq culture of East Siberia. Tracing the route of migration from East Siberia to Greenland through Alaska and Canada also became possible by comparing the ancient human genome with modern genome data; Saqqaqs had split from Chukchis, their closest relatives, some 5,500 years ago.
Sequencing the nuclear DNA and comparing the functional single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) with modern human genome data helped in identifying his appearance and roots. The study revealed that he had brown eyes, dark thick hair, and brown skin, which are typical Asian characteristics. His shovel-graded front teeth and earwax of the dry type are typical of Asians and native Americans. His metabolism and body mass index indicates that he was adapted to living in a cold climate. Sequencing the complete ancient genome became possible as hair tufts were excellently preserved in permafrost. However, the samples recovered in 1986 were stored at room temperature in the National History Museum of Denmark, Copenhagen, until they were studied recently. Past studies in humans and animals have shown that unlike bones and teeth, hair shafts are able to preserve mitochondrial DNA in larger quantities and for longer periods of time even at room temperature; the shaft's melanin material probably prevents DNA damage. But the latest study has shown that it is indeed possible to extract nuclear DNA from hair shafts, especially when hair is preserved in ice. The real challenge will be to extract nuclear DNA from samples recovered from temperate and tropical regions, where the majority of ancient human remains are found.
133) Poverty estimates vs food entitlements
Jean Drèze
Statistical poverty lines should not become real-life eligibility criteria for food entitlements.
Nothing is easier than to recognise a poor person when you see him or her. Yet the task of identifying and counting the poor seems to elude the country's best experts. Take for instance the “headcount” of rural poverty — the proportion of the rural population below the poverty line. At least four alternative figures are available: 28 per cent from the Planning Commission, 50 per cent from the N.C. Saxena Committee report, 42 per cent from the Tendulkar Committee report, and 80 per cent or so from the National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganised Sector (NCEUS).
On closer examination, the gaps are not as big as they look, because they are largely due to the differences in poverty lines. The underlying methodologies are much the same. The main exception is the Saxena Committee report, where the 50 per cent figure is based on an independent argument about the required coverage of the BPL Census. Other reports produce alternative figures by simply shifting the poverty line.
In this connection, it is important to remember that the poverty line is, ultimately, little more than an arbitrary benchmark. It is difficult to give it a normative interpretation (in this respect, the Tendulkar Committee report is far from convincing). The notion that everyone below a certain expenditure threshold is “poor,” while everyone else is “not poor,” makes little sense. Poverty is a matter of degree and to the extent that any particular threshold can be specified, it is likely to depend on the context of the exercise.
What tends to matter is not so much the level of the benchmark as consistency in applying it in different places and years (by using suitable “cost-of-living indexes” to adjust the benchmark), for comparative purposes. It is this consistency that is being threatened by the current mushrooming of independent poverty lines. In this respect, the Tendulkar Committee report does a reasonably good job of arguing for the adoption of the current, national, official urban poverty line as an “anchor.” State-wise urban and rural poverty lines are to be derived from it by applying suitable price indexes generated from the National Sample Survey data. This approach permits continuity with earlier poverty series, consistency of poverty estimation between sectors and States, and some method in the madness from now on.
As it happens, the Tendulkar Committee report's estimate of 42 per cent for rural poverty, based on this new poverty line, is not very different from the 50 per cent benchmark proposed in the Saxena Committee for the coverage of the BPL Census. In fact, the Tendulkar estimate, plus a very conservative margin of 10 per cent or so for targeting errors, would produce much the same figure as in the Saxena Committee report. Thus, one could argue for “50 per cent” as an absolute minimum for the coverage of the next BPL Census in rural areas.
However, poverty estimation is one thing, and social support is another. The main purpose of the BPL Census is to identify households eligible for social support, notably through the Public Distribution System (PDS) but also, increasingly, in other ways. In deciding the coverage of the BPL Census, allowance must be made not only for targeting errors, which can be very large, but also for other considerations, including the fact that under-nutrition rates in India tend to be much higher than poverty estimates. This gap is not so surprising, considering that the official “poverty line” is really a destitution line. The consumption basket that can be bought at the poverty line is extremely meagre. It was an important contribution of the NCEUS report to point out that even a moderately enhanced poverty line basket, costing Rs.20 per person per day, would be unaffordable for a large majority of the population. How would you like to live on Rs. 20 a day?
Also relevant here is the case for a universal as opposed to targeted PDS. The main argument is that the Right to Food is a fundamental right of all citizens (an aspect of the “Right to Life” under Article 21 of the Constitution), and that any targeting method inevitably entails substantial “exclusion errors.” This raises the question of the BPL Census methodology.
The 2002 BPL Census was based on a rather convoluted scoring method, involving 13 different indicators (related for instance to land ownership, occupation and education) with a score of 0 to 4 for each indicator, so that the aggregate score ranged from 0 to 52. There were serious conceptual flaws in this scoring system, and the whole method was also applied in a haphazard manner, partly due to its confused character. The result was a very defective census that left out large numbers of poor households. According to the 61st round of the National Sample Survey, among the poorest 20 per cent of rural households in 2004-05, barely half had a BPL Card. Any future BPL Census exercise must be based on a clear recognition of this major fiasco.
The Saxena Committee recently proposed an alternative BPL Census methodology, involving a simplified scoring system. Instead of 13 indicators, there are just five, with an aggregate score ranging from 0 to 10. This is a major improvement. Even this simplified method, however, is likely to be hard to comprehend for many rural households. This lack of transparency opens the door to manipulation, and undermines participatory verification of the BPL list. There is no guarantee that the results will be much better than those of the 2002 BPL Census.
Perhaps the proposed method can be further improved. But the bottom line is that any BPL Census is likely to be a bit of a hit-or-miss affair, not only because of inherent conceptual problems but also because of widespread irregularities on the ground. This is the main argument for universal provision of basic services, including access to the PDS. Another strong argument is that targeting is divisive, and undermines the unity of public demand for a functional PDS. It is perhaps no accident that the PDS works much better in Tamil Nadu, where it is universal, than in other States.
A universal PDS would, of course, involve a major increase in the food subsidy. However, universalisation could be combined with cost-saving measures such as decentralised procurement, self-management of Fair Price Shops by gram panchayats, and a range of transparency safeguards. There is no obvious alternative, if we are serious about ensuring food security for all. If someone has a better idea, let's hear it.
Meanwhile, the government seems to be running in the opposite direction, judging from the recent recommendations of the Empowered Group of Ministers (EGoM) in charge of the proposed National Food Security Act. The EGoM suggested not only that the government's legal obligation to provide foodgrain under PDS should be restricted to 25 kg per month for BPL families, but also that the Planning Commission's measly poverty figures should be used as a “ceiling” for the BPL list. This amounts to disregarding at least three official committee reports (Tendulkar, N.C. Saxena and NCEUS), and trivialising the proposed Act.
In a country where half of all children are underweight, the idea that freedom from hunger and under-nutrition can be made a legal right is rather bold and far-reaching. It has a bearing not only on the Public Distribution System but also on a range of other interventions and entitlements, relating for instance to child nutrition, social security, health care, and even property rights. Framing an effective National Food Security Act requires a great deal of creative work, public debate, and political commitment. Alas, seven months after the Finance Minister stated, in his previous budget speech, that work on the Act had “begun in right earnest,” and that a draft would be in the public domain “very soon,” things seem to be moving backward rather than forward. Let us see what the Honourable Minister has to say on this in his forthcoming budget speech.
(The author is Visiting Professor at the Department of Economics, University of Allahabad.)
134) One HIV test, but two results
Elizabeth Pisani
Antiretrovirals have virtually eliminated AIDS in the West. It's for this very reason they will not defeat HIV in Africa.
It's been a bad few months for HIV prevention. We've learned that our best candidates for vaccines and virus-killing microbicides don't work. Now we're clutching at another straw: maybe we can treat our way out of the HIV epidemic.
At an HIV research meeting this week, boffins from the World Health Organisation revived a mathematical model that shows that if we test everyone in Africa for HIV once a year and give everyone who tests positive expensive drugs right away and for the rest of their lives, we'll wipe out new HIV infections within seven years. That's because HIV is passed on most easily when there's lots of virus in the infected person's blood and body fluids. Antiretroviral medicines cut the “viral load” (the amount of virus in the body), so they make it more difficult to pass on HIV. Ergo, more treatment means fewer new infections.
Sadly, it's not that simple. For one thing, HIV is most infectious in the few months after a person is first infected. Even if everyone got tested annually, we'd miss most of these new infections. Second, people's viral load spikes upwards if they get another sexually transmitted infection (STI), or if they stop taking their medicine because the clinic runs out of stock, the meds make them feel sick, or they went on a three-day bender and forgot their pills. Interrupting treatment also allows the virus to develop resistance to drugs, and that leads to more spikes in viral load. Most importantly, antiretrovirals keep you alive and well enough to be out there meeting new sex partners. That's a good thing, obviously, but it also means that people who have HIV are going to have more chances to pass it on during those times when their viral load is spiky.
There's more. In countries like the U.K. where treatment has been available for over a decade, AIDS has virtually disappeared. HIV, unfortunately, has not. A few years after antiretrovirals became widely available, new infections among gay men in the U.K. began to rise. We've seen the same thing in Australia, the United States and practically everywhere else we have data. One reason for that is that gay men use condoms less now than they did when HIV = AIDS = a horrible death. Now, though, HIV = a pill every day. Boring, but not the end of the world, unless you're the taxpayer picking up the tab for it or the epidemiologist worrying that drug-resistant strains of HIV will reignite AIDS.
On top of that, many people assume that if the person they're having sex with is infected, they'll be on meds and so not very infectious. Which may be true if they're not in that early peak of infectiousness, have taken all their pills diligently, and don't have another STI. Though since condom use is dropping across the board, other STI rates are soaring. In short, more people living with HIV, combined with more unprotected sex, is outweighing the effects of lower viral load in places where the population is well informed, HIV testing is actively promoted, and treatment has been free and universally available. But in Africa it will be different.
Our computer model assumes every African will get tested for HIV every year, everyone who tests positive will start taking antiretrovirals immediately and 98 out of 100 will never miss a dose. On top of that, though gay men in rich countries use condoms far less now than they did before we had antiretrovirals, we assume that heterosexuals in Africa are going to use them more once the most visible and frightening face of AIDS disappears.
On the strength of this model, which bears as much relation to reality as a British MP's expense claim, we are going to hail expanded HIV treatment in Africa as the new answer to prevention. A triumph of optimism over common sense. — © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
( Elizabeth Pisani is a consultant epidemiologist specialising in HIV prevention. She writes about HIV, science and public policy at www. wisdomofwhores. com)
135) Australia has voiced empathy for India over its planning of security arrangements for hosting a series of international sports events from Sunday (February 28). Such an expression of support can tone up an equation that has been badly buffeted by the recent tensions over a series of attacks on Indians in Australia.
Surely, there is no linkage between India's security measures for the sports events and the safety of Indian students and others of Indian origin in Australia. However, Australia wants its sports personnel to feel safe in the context of the recent anti-India terrorist attacks.
On a different track, the safety of Indians in Australia is an issue that New Delhi has repeatedly discussed with Canberra. Unsurprisingly, both issues figured in Australian Foreign Minister Stephen Smith's recent talks with External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna in London.
Alluding to those talks, Mr. Smith, in London last week, said: “So far as arrangements for the Commonwealth Games are concerned, and for the Hockey World Cup are concerned, we are satisfied that all of the necessary consultations and coordination are occurring. ... It is a very regrettable fact of the modern era that there are always risks, security risks, in major sporting events, whether they are conducted in Australia — the Sydney Olympics or the Melbourne Commonwealth Games — or whether they are conducted in India.”
On the safety of Indians in Australia, Mr. Smith assured Mr. Krishna of updates on the probe into and the prosecutions for the various attacks. Remarkably candid, too, was the Australian government's statement on this issue in the House of Representatives in Canberra on February 9. Mr. Smith said: “Recent contemptible attacks on Indian students and others of Indian origin in Australia have cast a long shadow not only over our education links [with India] but across our broader relationship and bilateral agenda. These attacks are inexcusable. ... If any of these attacks have been racist in nature — and it seems clear some of them have — they [the perpetrators] will be punished with the full force of the law.” Mr. Smith went on to reaffirm Australia's “zero tolerance for racism.”
Two issues, seemingly semantic in scope but really substantive in nature, are acutely relevant to the long-term safety of Indians in Australia. The issues are the true nature of racism and the true quality of Australia's anti-racism commitment.
Emerging out of the well-chronicled attacks on Indians, including a stray “faked incident,” is an unmistakable pattern of targeting against this group. When the crisis, simmering for several years, acquired ominous tones last May, the Australian authorities genuinely believed that there was no racism in play. Soon after Sravan Kumar was attacked, this journalist failed to elicit a comment from Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, despite gaining brief access to him. It was on the sidelines of the Asia Pacific Security Conference or the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore last May. And, it stands to reason that Mr. Rudd was at that time convinced there was no evidence of a racist motive behind the attacks on Indians.
Even now, Mr. Smith is extremely cautious in acknowledging the possibility of a racist motive in some cases. In his recent parliamentary statement, he went no farther than to say that “it seems clear ... some ... attacks have been racist in nature.” Now, shorn of semantics, the juxtaposing of the words “seems” and “clear” is a qualitative indication of ambiguity about the extent of a racist motive. But, this does not imply ambivalence behind Mr. Smith's promise to “make a whole-of-nation, whole-of-government commitment” to address this problem.
With the recent murder of Nitin Garg serving as another wake-up call for the Australian authorities, there are signs that they may make a reality check. At one stage, the security agencies at the grassroots appeared eager to rule out racist motives even before concluding the investigations. The serious-minded Australian observers remain conscious, though, that the ties with India can still be held hostage by a few law-breakers, regardless of motives.
It is in such a fragile ambience of hope that India's High Commissioner to Australia, Sujatha Singh, sums up the puzzle in simple but telling words: “The fundamental issue is the growing number of attacks, which seem to be disproportionately affecting Indians, especially in and around Melbourne. ... The anxious parents of the more than 120,000 Indian students in Australia are asking for clear answers to certain questions: Are our children safe in Australia? Why does it seem that only, or mainly, Indians are the victims? Are the assailants being caught? Are they being punished? Is the situation becoming better or worse?”
Mrs. Singh has received signals that Australia, as a friendly country, is willing to work with India to resolve the issues. But, she is not alone in seeking credible answers through results on the ground.
Regardless of the Indian perspectives, Australia's Leader of the Opposition, Tony Abbott, links the issue to the country's crime scene as he sees it. The “heart of the matter,” he hinted on February 23, was the series of “racially-motivated bashings in unsafe streets.”
Central to a solution is the political will to address the crime scene in Australia, with reference to new racism, if any, or the vestiges, if any, of old attitudes. Robin Jeffrey, an Australian expert, sees the current scene as “a cloud [with] a big silver lining, if the next year can be handled well.” In a conversation with this correspondent, Mr. Jeffrey, who knows India well, said: “Longer term, it has focussed Australia and India on each other as never happened before. There is a real critical mass of young people who are going back and forth. So, the relationship in five years will be stronger than it has ever been. It is for both governments now to institutionalise more ways of communicating.”
“Strategic partnership”
On the central issue of alleged racism, Mr. Jeffrey said: “If racism means picking on somebody because they are of a different colour and you know they are going to be relatively easier-marked than somebody else, then that is racism. ... To me, racism is nastier and more elaborate and more sophisticated than that. It is: organisations that promote hatred, it is a body of ideas that suggests racial superiority of one kind or another. It was there around Pauline Hanson's time 15 years ago [in Australia], and it crawled back under its rock.” In the light of what he aptly described as “publicity ping-pong” over the current issues, he and some other experts see a danger of a revival of such racism.
Independent of such views of experts, it is clear that India and Australia need to go beyond a symphony of political sentiments against racism. Practical cooperation, in terms of their current ideas of a “strategic partnership,” is required.
136) NCHER Bill: mismatch between promises and provisions
Thomas Joseph, Member Secretary, Kerala State Higher Education Council, writes:
This is a response to the rejoinder of Dr. N.R. Madhava Menon (Feb. 22, 2010) to my article on National Commission for Higher Education and Research (NCHER) Bill (Feb. 6, 2010).
I stand by my argument that the pious intensions to promote autonomy of higher educational institutions set forth in the preamble of the bill are undermined by various provisions of the bill. Let me cite a few provisions from the bill. It is mandatory for all universities, including state universities, to appoint Vice-Chancellors only from a panel of five names forwarded by the Commission from within the national registry of scholars prepared by it (clause 26). A university constituted by an act of Parliament or State Legislature shall commence its academic operations only after being authorised by the Commission (clause 32). For such authorisation, the university has to produce satisfactory assessment report from an accreditation agency registered with the Commission (Clause 33). Authorisation once granted can be revoked by the Commission, without reference to the Parliament/State Legislature, as the case may be (clause 36). No university shall award degrees unless it is authorised by the Commission in this regard (Clause 41). The Commission shall frame national curriculum and enforce it in the universities through regulations (Clause 54). All these new arrangements further undermine the limited administrative and academic autonomy the universities enjoy today.
A single window regulatory system at the Central level might be a convenient device for enforcing national policies across the country. But the bill provides no structural safety-net to insulate the system against authoritarianism and corruption, which have been the bane of apex regulatory bodies like the UGC, the AICTE and the NCTE, which are being subsumed by the NCHER. The apprehension is all the more serious as extensive regulatory, administrative and financial powers, which the UGC or other apex regulatory agencies never enjoyed, are sought to be bestowed upon the Commission. Such concentration of powers in a small body of seven experts is potentially dangerous.
It is not clear as to how the new system could ensure “true autonomy of universities and institutions of higher learning.” Autonomy implies not only “delivery of educational services” as “a decentralised activity at the institutional level,” as Dr. Madhava Menon would have us believe, but also taking policy decisions on what to teach, whom to teach and how to teach and setting up and administering institutions that are engaged in such activities. Since autonomy also implies accountability to national and local societal values and goals, the implementation of autonomy inevitably also involves setting up a two-tier regulatory mechanism, one at the national and the other at the State level. Hence the issue of federalism in education is not one of “legislative competence” alone. It is one of the defining features of autonomy, more so in a country of continental dimensions as ours. Autonomy thrives through decentralisation, through celebration of diversity.
In a federal set-up, State governments cannot be treated as a part of the amorphous crowd of “stakeholders.” They are as much policymakers as the Central government. The appropriate forum for consulting the states on the collaborative enterprise of education is not hurriedly convened meetings of “stakeholders,” but the Central Advisory Board of Education (CABE), which was revived from limbo after a gap of 10 years only in 2004. Constitutionality apart, a democratic, consensual process of decision making should get precedence over arguments over legislative competence, administrative convenience and pious intentions. Education is so much an integral part of the project of inclusive nation building that it cannot be merrily abandoned to the care of seven experts, even if they all happen to be Nobel Laureates.
137) UNEP awards for two institutions
The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) on Tuesday awarded an appreciation to two institutions that managed to produce environmental-friendly products while at the same time having capability to improve livelihood for poor people.
In a prize awarding ceremony, the UNEP's Executive Director and Under-Secretary General of the United Nations Achim Steiner said that the companies, named Trees, Water and People (TWP) and Nuru Design changed the lives of thousands of school children, housewives and villagers across Latin America, Africa and India.
“This is the green economy of tomorrow in an action today,” said Steiner. The appreciation called the Sasakawa Prize worth $200,000 each was awarded to Nuru Design as the company has brought rechargeable lights to villages in Rwanda, Kenya and India while TWP is an organisation that collaborates with local non- governmental organisations in distributing fuel-efficient cook stoves to communities in Honduras, Guatemala, El Savador, Nicaragua and Haiti.
Wangari Mathai, a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, who is one of the juries, said that both institutions managed to fulfil three standards set namely replicable, taking side on grassroots people and inexpensive.
“Obviously, they address issues of environment and poverty as their creation managed to improve livelihood and in the same time protecting environment,” said Mathai.
Stuart Conway, co-founder and International Director of TWP said that stove he created managed to reduce forest cuts and improve health of housewives as it is completed by chimney that emit smoke to outdoor.
The founder and Chief Executive Officer of Nuru Design said that the rechargeable lights managed to reduce dependence of kerosene to energise lantern, a fossil fuel that is expensive for poor people and emits smoke that is unhealthy and environmentally unfriendly. — Xinhua
Corrections and Clarifications
• In a report “Dutch Cabinet quits over Afghan troops” (“International” page, February 21, 2010), the expansion of CDA was given as the Christian Democrat Party, leading to a query. The formal name of the party is Christian Democratic Appeal but it is (a) Christian Democratic party.
• The caption of the photograph that went with a report “Irizar-TVS Tiruchi unit on stream” (“Business/Market” page, February 20, 2010) was “… ( from left) Jose Manuel Orcasitas, R. Seshasayee, R. Dinesh, Directors of Irizar-TVS, with the iT09 super luxury coach at the company's unit at Viralimalai near Tiruchi on Friday. It should have said “(from right).”
• The caption of the photograph that went with an athletics report “Rono wins Chennai Marathon” (“Sport”, February 21, 2010) was “… Kenya's Augustine Rono managed to finish a minute and a half ahead of India's Santosh Kumar”, while the results said “Marathon (42.2km): International: 1. Augustine Rono (Kenya) 2h 14m 45s, 2. Santosh Kumar (Uttar Pradesh) 2:27:25 …”. There was a difference of more than 12 minutes between the winner and the second placed runner. The error was in the caption.
• In a cricket report “Pakistan beats England” (“Sport”, February 20, 2010), England made 148 for six in 20 overs while Pakistan scored 149 for six in 10 overs. In the scoreboard, it should have been “England bowling” under Pakistan innings, and not “Pakistan bowling”.
It is the policy of The Hindu to correct significant errors as soon as possible. Please specify the edition (place of publication), date and page.
The Readers' Editor's office can be contacted by
Telephone: +91-44-28418297/28576300 (11 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday to Friday);
Fax: +91-44-28552963;
E-mail: readerseditor@thehindu.co.in
Mail: Readers' Editor, The Hindu, Kasturi Buildings,
859 & 860 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002, India.
All communication must carry the full postal address and telephone number.
No personal visits.
The Terms of Reference for the Readers' Editor are on www.thehindu.co
138) A catalogue of good intentions
As expected, Railway Minister Mamata Banerjee has presented her second budget without any increase in passenger fares or freight tariff. In fact, she announced a marginal reduction in service charges for sleeper and air-conditioned class tickets, as also a cut of Rs.100 per wagon in the freight of food grains and kerosene as a response to rising prices. Otherwise, the 2010-11 budget will be remembered for its intentions and policy pronouncements rather than for specific budgetary measures. For instance, she has promised to come up with a business model for the Railways, to set up a task force for clearing private investment in Public Private Partnership (PPP) projects within 100 days, and to find innovative funding methods to operationalise the ambitious ‘Vision 2020' plan tabled in Parliament. Despite the slowdown in the economy, the Railways hopes to exceed its announced freight loading target of 882 million tonnes this year and touch 890 million tonnes. The target for next year has been set at an ambitious 944 million tonnes. To ward off criticism that she was focussing inordinately on her home State, West Bengal, where elections are due next year, Ms Banerjee has tried to evenly spread the proposed new projects and trains among different regions. She has promised an India-Bangladesh rail link to commemorate the 150th anniversary of Rabindranath Tagore.
Among the positive features is the Minister's promise to add 1000 route-kilometres of railway track this year, as against an annual average of just over 180 km over the past decade. The budget allocation for metro projects has been raised by 55 per cent over last year. A record Plan outlay of Rs.41,426 crore has been proposed for the coming year, but nearly a fourth of it is to come from market borrowings. Although Ms Banerjee repeatedly spoke of the PPP mode to speed up the implementation of the infrastructure projects, she did not indicate any specific framework, and the markets were not enthused. Following the signing of an MoU with the Health Ministry, the Railways announced plans to set up 381 medical diagnostic centres. Five sports academies and a National Authority to plan high speed corridors for passenger traffic, on the lines of the Dedicated Freight corridors, are among the other noteworthy announcements. Perhaps the most significant focus has been on the critical areas of safety and security. Apart from expanding the high-tech Train Protection Warning System, the Minister committed herself to strengthening the Railway Protection Force and raising 12 companies of women in this force. Industry hopes that Ms Banerjee will come up with a detailed framework for PPP before long to realise her vision.
139) A catalogue of good intentions
As expected, Railway Minister Mamata Banerjee has presented her second budget without any increase in passenger fares or freight tariff. In fact, she announced a marginal reduction in service charges for sleeper and air-conditioned class tickets, as also a cut of Rs.100 per wagon in the freight of food grains and kerosene as a response to rising prices. Otherwise, the 2010-11 budget will be remembered for its intentions and policy pronouncements rather than for specific budgetary measures. For instance, she has promised to come up with a business model for the Railways, to set up a task force for clearing private investment in Public Private Partnership (PPP) projects within 100 days, and to find innovative funding methods to operationalise the ambitious ‘Vision 2020' plan tabled in Parliament. Despite the slowdown in the economy, the Railways hopes to exceed its announced freight loading target of 882 million tonnes this year and touch 890 million tonnes. The target for next year has been set at an ambitious 944 million tonnes. To ward off criticism that she was focussing inordinately on her home State, West Bengal, where elections are due next year, Ms Banerjee has tried to evenly spread the proposed new projects and trains among different regions. She has promised an India-Bangladesh rail link to commemorate the 150th anniversary of Rabindranath Tagore.
Among the positive features is the Minister's promise to add 1000 route-kilometres of railway track this year, as against an annual average of just over 180 km over the past decade. The budget allocation for metro projects has been raised by 55 per cent over last year. A record Plan outlay of Rs.41,426 crore has been proposed for the coming year, but nearly a fourth of it is to come from market borrowings. Although Ms Banerjee repeatedly spoke of the PPP mode to speed up the implementation of the infrastructure projects, she did not indicate any specific framework, and the markets were not enthused. Following the signing of an MoU with the Health Ministry, the Railways announced plans to set up 381 medical diagnostic centres. Five sports academies and a National Authority to plan high speed corridors for passenger traffic, on the lines of the Dedicated Freight corridors, are among the other noteworthy announcements. Perhaps the most significant focus has been on the critical areas of safety and security. Apart from expanding the high-tech Train Protection Warning System, the Minister committed herself to strengthening the Railway Protection Force and raising 12 companies of women in this force. Industry hopes that Ms Banerjee will come up with a detailed framework for PPP before long to realise her vision.
140) Evasions on torture
On the ABC News programme ‘This Week' on February 14, former United States Vice-President Dick Cheney openly advocated torture, and confirmed that while in office he authorised it in over 30 cases. In the United Kingdom, the Court of Appeal accepted a Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) request on February 8 that a passage be removed from a draft judgment confirming that the British security services had been complicit in torture. The deletion overrides a precedent set in 1637 that there must be no secret communication between lawyers and courts during proceedings. The senior appeal judge, Lord Neuberger, the head of the civil judiciary in England and Wales, seems to have assumed, incorrectly, that the FCO had followed the normal practice of copying its request to all the other parties, among whom are rights NGOs and certain British and American media organisations. The FCO claimed that publication would damage the U.S.-U.K. intelligence-sharing agreement under which British bodies had obtained the relevant information and would therefore jeopardise national security. The case related to Binyam Mohamed, an Ethiopian citizen and U.K. resident, who was arrested in Pakistan in 2002, sent to Morocco and Afghanistan where he was tortured, and held at Guantánamo Bay for five years without charge or trial.
The other parties in the case intervened with the appeal court, and on February 10 the court ordered the FCO to publish the material involved. The American and British reactions to both reveal calculated evasions. Mr. Cheney has effectively admitted to war crimes, and the U.S. has in the past prosecuted Japanese soldiers, as well as Texan police officers, for waterboarding. In the U.K., Alan Johnson, Home Minister, and Kim Howells, who chairs the House of Commons Intelligence and Security Committee, have respectively attacked the media and commentators for spreading “groundless accusations,” “ludicrous lies,” and a “calumny and a slur” by saying the security services had colluded in torture. Since the appeal ruling, Foreign Minister David Miliband has said the legal position has not changed, as the details had already emerged in a U.S. court. A White House official, on condition of anonymity, says the intelligence-sharing agreement stands. The British government is, however, only trying to explain away the fact that it has systematically concealed torture and political embarrassment under unjustified claims of threats to national security. With such a record, western criticism of other states' rights records rings quite hollow.
141) Water as the carrier of concord with Pakistan
Siddharth Varadarajan
If Islamabad can win New Delhi's trust by cracking down on terror, it could pave the way for the two sides to work together for optimum development of the Indus basin.
As India and Pakistan move towards the welcome resumption of dialogue, New Delhi needs to factor in a new reality: More than Kashmir, it is the accusation that India is stealing water that is rapidly becoming the “core issue” in the Pakistani establishment's narrative about bilateral problems.
The issue of water is emotive, touching people across Pakistan in a much more fundamental way than the demand for Kashmiri self-determination. Per capita water availability has fallen precipitously over the past few decades, thanks to rising population and poor water management and is expected to fall below 700 cubic metres by 2025 — the international marker for water scarcity. In most years, the Indus barely makes it beyond the Kotri barrage in Sindh, leading to the ingress of sea water, the increase in soil salinity and the destruction of agriculture in deltaic districts like Thatta and Badin.
Though Pakistan's water woes predate recent hydroelectric projects like Baglihar in Jammu and Kashmir, jihadi organisations like the Lashkar-e-Taiba/Jamaat-ud-Dawa have started blaming India for the growing shortage of water. Apart from inflaming public opinion against India, this propaganda helps to blunt the resentment Sindh and Balochistan have traditionally had — as the lowest riparians in the Indus river basin — against West Punjab for drawing more than its fair share of the water flowing through the provinces. The campaign also deflects criticism of Pakistan's own gross neglect of its water and sanitation sector infrastructure over the past few decades.
At the same time, the fact that river flows from India to Pakistan have slowly declined is borne out by data on both sides. Above Merala on the Chenab, for example, the average monthly flows for September have nearly halved between 1999 and 2009. India says this is because of reduced rainfall and snowmelt. Pakistan disputes this claim, preferring to link observable reductions in flows to hydroelectric projects on the Indian side. That is why, in the run-up to the February 25 meeting of the Indian and Pakistani Foreign Secretaries, Islamabad has gone out of its way to project water as the most important topic it intends to raise.
But just because water — and not terrorism — tops the Pakistani agenda today is no reason for India to refuse to discuss the subject or to treat it as important. Even as it pushes for incremental gains on terrorism, trade and CBMs, New Delhi should take a strategic view and consider two questions. First, how would a refusal to talk water play on the Pakistani political stage, where the two provinces least inclined towards jihad — Sindh and Balochistan — are also the most vulnerable to anti-India propaganda about water theft? Second, is it just possible that Islamabad could be so keen for Indian cooperation on water that it might be willing to abandon the terrorist groups it has nurtured all these years as an instrument of policy against India?
To pose the problem in this way is not to suggest a neat symmetry between two taps — that as Pakistan turns off the terrorism faucet, India can offer to turn on the water. If matters were that simple, the two neighbours would either have solved their problems by now or gone to war. Instead, the link between terror and water is more complex and it revolves around trust. Simply put, Pakistan needs to realise that decisive action against terrorism would create an enabling environment for India to go beyond the letter of its written commitments on water and open the door for cooperation in other fields like energy that could also relieve some of the water pressure both countries are facing.
Though inter-provincial disputes over water sharing were a fact of life in this region before 1947, the partition of the subcontinent introduced a further complexity. It was easy for Radcliffe to draw a line on a map and divide up the land of British India but people and water were harder to partition. The mass migration and bloodshed this triggered is well-known but the rupture to the region's hydrological system proved to be just as traumatic. The rivers which irrigated the new nation all had their origins in India. But as an upper riparian locked in a politically adversarial relationship with Pakistan, the Indian side had little or no incentive to look at the Indus basin as an integrated water system. The early years of independence saw bitter disputes as India treated the waters of the Indus's five tributaries — Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi, Beas and Sutlej — as its own. Geography and terrain meant the Indus itself could not be harnessed on the Indian side of Jammu and Kashmir but intermittent, small-scale, diversions on the tributaries generated considerable tension with Pakistan. In 1960, the two countries sought to put an end to this tension by signing the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) with the World Bank's mediation.
The IWT partitioned the six rivers of the Indus watershed on a crudely longitudinal basis. India was given exclusive use of the waters of the three eastern tributaries, the Ravi, Beas and Sutlej, and the right to “non-consumptive” use of the western rivers, namely the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab. Under the IWT, India renounced its right to block or divert the flows of the ‘western' rivers and agreed to confine itself to run-of-the-river hydroelectric projects and the drawing of irrigation water for a specified acreage of farm land. This partitioning was irrational from an ecological standpoint and led to both sides incurring considerable expense as they were forced to develop canal infrastructure drawing on “their” allocated rivers to compensate for the non-use of the other side's rivers despite that water flowing through their own territory.
Pakistani officials from time to time do accuse India of violating the 1960 treaty on the division of the Indus waters. The Indian side, of course, denies this, and there is, in any case, a system of international mediation built into the IWT for binding international arbitration if the two countries cannot resolve a water-related dispute. Pakistan invoked this mechanism for Baglihar in 2005, though the arbitrator ruled in favour of the project subject to certain modifications. An earlier dispute over the Salal project was resolved in the 1970s by the two Foreign Secretaries. Today, nothing prevents Pakistan from referring any or all of the projects India proposes to build on the Chenab and Jhelum for arbitration.
Though the treaty has a mechanism to ensure compliance with the stipulated partitioning of rivers, a major weakness from Pakistan's standpoint is that it does not compel or require India to do anything on its side for the optimum development of what is, after all, an integrated water system. Inflows to Pakistan depend not just on rainfall and snowmelt in India and China (the uppermost eastern riparian) but also on the health of tributaries, streams, nullahs and acquifers as well as groundwater, soil and forest management practices. This is a classic externality problem. Costs incurred by the upper riparian on responsible watershed management will produce disproportionate benefits for the lower riparian, hence they are not incurred.
The IWT anticipated the importance of cooperation with Article VII stating that both parties “recognise that they have a common interest in the optimum development of the rivers, and to that extent, they declare their intention to cooperate, by mutual agreement, to the fullest extent”. So far, little has been done by either side to develop this mandate.
Since water does not figure as a standalone topic in the Composite Dialogue framework, Pakistan's insistence on its revival is at odds with its professed priority. When the Foreign Secretaries meet, therefore, they should not allow process to stand in the way of progress. They could, for example, discuss a framework for a standalone dialogue on water going beyond project-related disputes — for which an arbitration mechanism already exists. The focus could be on identifying short, medium and long-term steps for the optimum development of the rivers.
The Pakistani side would very quickly realise that such a dialogue, whose benefits, especially over the long-term, are tilted in its favour, can only deliver meaningful results if there is an atmosphere of confidence and trust. If the activities of terrorists like the LeT/JuD are allowed to continue, this is unlikely to happen. But if the action Islamabad has repeatedly promised does take place, a path might open for cooperation in other areas too.
Many of the disputes that seem to be driven by fears of water scarcity are actually a reflection of another kind of scarcity: electricity. Pakistan opposes the Indian Kishenganga hydel project on the Jhelum, for example, because it will interfere with its proposed Neelum-Jhelum power plant. But if the two countries could build trust in one another, there is no reason why they cannot agree on energy swaps that could do away with the need to duplicate power projects, especially those which restrict the flow of water. Today, given the way terrorism has eroded the Indian political system's capacity and willingness to do business with Pakistan, such ideas seem hopelessly utopian. But they do offer a glimpse of the kind of future that might be possible should the terrorist menace end. Rather than refusing to talk water, India should show Pakistan how the keys to ending its aquatic insecurities lie in its own hands.
142) Questions for my father: a memoir
Pranay Gupte
Twenty-five years ago on this day, my father died in Mumbai. Had he lived, he would have turned 100 today.
I was not with Balkrishna Gupte when he died after a long illness that, to this day, remains mysterious to me. Some physicians said it was cancer of the oesophagus, others said it was complications from a botched surgery of the alimentary canal. Still others offered other reasons — unpronounceable medical conditions with fancy names that only doctors could decipher. In the end, no matter what those conditions or how multi-syllabic those names, my father's heart stopped beating.
I was thousands of miles away at my home in New York when that happened. It was an unseasonably sunny day, but as I worked on a book that had unforgiving deadlines, I felt out of sorts, as though something ominous was going to happen that morning in February 1985. I knew that my father was grievously ill because I had just returned from visiting him in India, but I hadn't been persuaded that he was close to death. Or perhaps it was that I didn't want to accept that possibility; it was a son's denial of the inevitability of a parent's departure. As if on cue that winter morning, a friend called from Mumbai to tell me that my father had passed away.
In that last meeting with my father, I gently stroked his face, kissed him on the forehead, squeezed his still-strong shoulders, and said that I would be back soon. His voice had left him by then, so my father just smiled gently and spoke with his eyes. He said that he loved me and that I would always be his son. He said that his love was unconditional, even if mine sometimes seemed predicated on proximity.
The next time I saw him, my father's eyes were closed. His body was still, it was wrapped in white linen in preparation for a traditional Hindu cremation. As a son, I expected that he would open his eyes and reach out to me with his sinewy hands as he always did, that he would bathe me with affection and offer his protection. As a world-weary adult, however, I knew that he was gone.
Gone? My father? That tall, sturdy man who'd been the bulwark of my life, always a calming spirit? He who had coaxed my mother to overcome her opposition to her son leaving home to study in the United States because he felt that I needed to understand the world? He who was always open-minded about faith, always strong in his secularism and never compromising about his values — honesty, loyalty, kindness, generosity and, yes, humility and humour? That man gone?
Gone? My father? Not even the body in repose in the living room of my parents' Mumbai apartment persuaded me that my father was dead. But then I looked at my mother, and then I knew. It had always been the three of us — and a beloved uncle who lived with us until his death in 1982 — but from here on, it would be just the two of us. On December 31 of that year, 1985, my mother died. This time the doctors said that she died of heart failure. They were wrong again. I know that she died of a broken heart.
The world has honoured my mother since her death: there's a major square in Mumbai named after her — Prof. Dr. Charusheela Gupte Chowk (“square” in the local language of Marathi). Articles have been written about her vast accomplishments as an author and an academician and a social activist for downtrodden women and dispossessed children. Her students still write to me about how much she influenced their lives and careers. And those colleagues that are still living send me, from time to time, warm remembrances of their association. Whenever we meet in India, we exchange anecdotes and reminisce about an era that ended so long ago.
About my father, very little has been said in the public arena. He wasn't a public figure, of course, nor did he lead his life publicly. He led a quiet life as a banker and lawyer. He attended weddings and christenings and religious ceremonies and lectures on history and spiritualism, often taking me along when I was growing up; if I were to draw a map of all the fascinating people and places he took me to see, I'd need the help of a cartographer.
I would also ask such a cartographer to chart the landscape of my father's emotional life. It would be a formidable task, of course, and most certainly not within the competence of conventional cartographers. My father did not leave behind books or learned essays or plays or poetry. He left diaries, to be sure, but the notations were mostly in shorthand that only he knew. During his illness, he wrote me a note saying how proud he was of what I'd done in my life.
My life? But what about his own life? What animated it? Why did he prefer the anonymity of being a largely unseen consort of a highly ambitious spouse, my mother? What gave shape to those inner strengths that energised and comforted her and me and so many others who came into the ambit of my father's life? What explained his integrity, even when he could have taken short cuts just as easily in a corrupt society led by corrupt men? What about his unflinching tolerance of all faiths and beliefs, his refusal to denigrate those who might disagree with him? What about his many unheralded kindnesses to needy people who scarcely bothered to remember? What about his acuity, his keen perceptions about the frequently uncharitable ways of the world? How had his parents influenced him, an only son like his own? What formed his steadfast conviction that good would always triumph over evil, even if only in the long run?
So many questions, so few answers. I wish now that I had been with my father in those final days, holding his hands, asking him about the architecture of his life. Would he have set aside his innate modesty and told me what I wanted to know? Would he have been his own cartographer, mapping out his life for his journalist son? With his voice gone, would his eyes have communicated his story in its entirety? Or would he have asked me why I had waited until the winter to pose my questions? There would not have been any reproach in his question, but there would be sadness.
He could have told me so much. But I never asked. And now — and now it is 25 years later, my father is gone, and I have more questions about his love and his life. I can pose those questions, perhaps more sharply now than ever before because I am in the autumn of my own full life. Who will answer them? I know that I will have to wait until it's the three of us together again — and my beloved uncle. But I wish that there were some way I could say to my father before that reunion how very sorry I am that I never asked while I was much younger and he wasn't quite 100 years old.
(Pranay Gupte is a veteran journalist and author or editor of 11 books. His most recent book, Mother India: A Political Biography of Indira Gandhi , was published in October 2009 by Viking Penguin. His next book, on India and the Middle East, will be released this year.)
Corrections and Clarifications
• The second paragraph of a report “Scrap land bank scheme, Gowda tells Yeddyurappa” (February 23, 2010) was “Talking to journalists here, Mr. Gowda said the policy was ‘highly improper, unlawful and strongly objectionable' as more than 1.71 acres of land in 26 districts had been notified amid protests by farmers and landowners.” The figure should have been “1.71 lakh acres”.
• A subheading “Misbehaviour” in a Hyderabad report “JAC, Congress sever ties” (February 20, 2010) related to a paragraph on alleged misbehaviour by police with girl students. In the Kerala editions, this paragraph was edited out while the subheading was retained; it did not relate to the paragraph that followed which was on village to State level committees being set up.
• “Dxam” should have been “exam”. The heading of a 3-column report (Some Tamil Nadu editions, February 23, 2010) was “IGNOU introduces ‘on demand dxam'”.
• The seventh paragraph of a report “[Periyar Maniammai] University conducts competition to invite designs” (Some Tamil Nadu and Online editions, February 23, 2010) was “Winners ... K.S. Ranganatha, M/s K.S. Ranh Architecure, Chennai bagged the first prize of Rs. 2.5 lakh for its best design ....” The architect's name is Ar. K.S. Ranganath, and not K.S. Ranganatha. The architectural firm's name is K.S. Ranganath Architecture, and not K.S. Ranh Architecure.
It is the policy of The Hindu to correct significant errors as soon as possible. Please specify the edition (place of publication), date and page.
The Readers' Editor's office can be contacted by
Telephone: +91-44-28418297/28576300 (11 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday to Friday);
Fax: +91-44-28552963;
E-mail: readerseditor@thehindu.co.in
Mail: Readers' Editor, The Hindu, Kasturi Buildings,
859 & 860 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002, India.
All communication must carry the full postal address and telephone number.
No personal visits.
The Terms of Reference for the Readers' Editor are on www.thehindu.com
143) Time to talk of a political process
Kai Eide
The process must be shaped and led by Afghan authorities and cannot be imposed.
— Photo: AP
Leaders of the Shinwari tribe pledge fealty to the Afghan Constitution during a meeting at a U.S. base in Jalalabad recently.
The largest military offensive since 2002 is now underway in the Helmand province in Afghanistan. At the same time, a consensus is emerging that ultimately, the conflict in this country cannot be solved by military means. I have consistently advocated preparing the ground for a political process, which could lead to a political settlement. Military operations must, therefore, be conducted in a way that does not close the space for such a process.
At the recent London Conference, more than 70 countries and organisations agreed to create a trust fund that would help integrate Taliban and other insurgents who accept to stop fighting. The details of how this fund will work, who will be targeted and how incentives will be provided remain to be worked out.
It is my view that this reintegration trust fund is not in itself a “game changer” as some tend to believe. It could, however, be an important tool if combined with a reconciliation process aimed at those who take part in the insurgency for ideological rather than economic reasons and if at some point that process involves the political structures of the insurgency. I have long maintained that if you want relevant and sustainable results, you will have to involve relevant people with authority in an appropriate way.
There are no doubt fighters who are on the side of the insurgency because of a lack of licit economic opportunities. However, I believe we tend to exaggerate their numbers. We should not underestimate the number of those who fight for reasons of ideology, resentment and a sense of humiliation — in addition to criminal elements. Often, such motivation stems from a conviction that the government is corrupt and unable to provide law and order combined with a sense of foreign invasion — not only in military terms but in terms of disrespect for Afghanistan's culture, values and religion. Offering financial incentives only could be perceived as an attempt to buy loyalties or convictions and generate further resentment. A reintegration fund without a political process could easily harden the insurgency rather than weakening it. While it may not be difficult to buy a young man out of unemployment — even if this could also be unsustainable, it is difficult to buy him out of his convictions, sense of humiliation or alienation from power.
The Afghan government and the international community have repeatedly stated their basic conditions for a political process. At the centre of these conditions stands acceptance of and respect for the Afghan Constitution. The insurgency cannot be allowed — by political means — to bring the country back to the dark years of the 1990s. Those who choose to reconcile must respect the achievements made since 2002 and accept the aspirations of the majority of Afghans for a peaceful and prosperous Afghanistan, where each and every Afghan can enjoy the rights given to them.
A political process must be shaped and led by Afghan authorities and cannot be imposed by international civilians or military with scant knowledge of this complex society. However, the international community must support — in financial and political terms — and facilitate where the Afghan authorities desire. This process — when it is launched — will not come about suddenly. Nor will it yield a dramatic breakthrough overnight. It will require careful orchestration among key actors.
Loud and public invitations to the insurgency to join a reconciliation process will most likely be met with rejections. More cautious diplomatic initiatives may produce results. As in many other peace processes, confidence-building measures could be undertaken to test the prospects for a wider process. The delisting of individuals from the U.N. sanctions list could be one such measure. Five individuals have already been delisted as a result of a request by the Afghan government in January. More should be considered. Another confidence-building measure should be the release of detainees from facilities such as the U.S. detention centre at Bagram.
However, such steps would have to be followed by measures undertaken by the insurgency. A commitment from the Taliban not to attack health facilities or schools and to facilitate humanitarian assistance could be initial contributions. In his declaration following the London Conference, the leader of the Taliban, Mullah Omar, stated that he was committed to provide education to all Afghans. The Taliban should demonstrate that this is serious by stopping attacks on schools. In the past, the Taliban has also facilitated access to areas under its control for humanitarian assistance, such as vaccination programmes — at least on a temporary basis. Further steps to improve access for humanitarian action should be taken. Such confidence-building measures would serve to test if a process towards a political settlement is possible.
President Hamid Karzai has announced his intention to organise a peace jirga later this spring. The aim would be two-fold: first, to forge an inclusive nationwide consensus around a political process. A reconciliation policy cannot be allowed to create new fragmentation inside Afghan society along ethnic lines. Second, the jirga process will mobilise religious and community leaders for reconciliation. This effort must also involve Afghanistan's civil society — including women's groups — to ensure that the rights of all are respected and that the reconciliation of some does not happen at the expense of others. The peace jirga must be more than an event. It must be the beginning of a process, an internal and inclusive dialogue, which allows Afghan leaders to approach the process of reconciliation knowing that the Afghan society as such stands behind it.
Furthermore, the involvement of neighbouring countries, especially Pakistan, will be critical. A strong and genuine involvement by Pakistan will be key to any peace and reconciliation process.
The military campaign will continue over the next weeks and months. However, it must not lead us further in the direction of a militarisation of our overall strategy in Afghanistan. There is — particularly at this moment — an urgent need to inject more political oxygen in the non-military areas of our partnership. (Courtesy: U.N. Information Centre, New Delhi)
(Kai Eide is the Special Representative of the U.N. Secretary-General for Afghanistan)
144) U.K. poll shows fall in belief in climate threat
Juliette Jowit
British public conviction about the threat of climate change has declined sharply after months of questions over the science and growing disillusionment with government action, a leading poll has found.
The proportion of British adults who believe climate change is “definitely” a reality has dropped from 44 per cent to 31 per cent in the last year, according to the latest survey by Ipsos Mori.
Overall, about nine in 10 people questioned still appear to accept that some degree of global warming is happening.
But the steep drop in those who have no doubts could mean it will be harder to persuade the public to support action to curb the problem, particularly with higher prices for energy and other goods.
The poll also found a significant drop in those who said climate change was caused by human activities. A year ago this number was one in three, but this year just one in five people believe global warming to be caused by people, according to Edward Langley, Ipsos Mori's head of environment research.
“It's going to be a hard sell to make people make changes to their behaviour unless there's something else in it for them — [such as] energy efficiency measures saving money on fuel bills,” said Mr. Langley. “It's a hard sell to tell people not to fly off for weekends away if you're not wholly convinced by the links. Even people who are [convinced] still do it.” The latest poll, taken at the end of January, follows two months of allegations which claimed climate scientists might have manipulated and withheld data, and the inclusion of a flawed statement on Himalayan glaciers in the influential 2007 report on the science and impact of climate change by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
However, whether or not these events are behind the public uncertainty is in doubt. Russ Lidstone, chief executive of the advertising agency Euro RSCG, which commissioned the Ipsos Mori survey, said the research among consumers found “great cynicism now as a result of questions in popular culture and regarding the credibility of IPCC data”.
But a recent poll for the BBC suggested these events had had less influence on U.K. public opinion than had the cold British winter.
U.K. Energy and Climate Change Secretary Ed Miliband, who recently called on the public to ignore the “siren voices” of climate sceptics, said the poll illustrated the scale of the task of building public support for action. — © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010
145) A balanced review
In line with the recent optimistic forecasts by both official and non-official agencies, the pre-Budget Economic Survey estimates that the economy could grow by as high as 8.75 per cent during 2010-11 and move to 9 per cent the next year. It is a tribute to India's economic management that the economy seems certain to grow, so soon after the global crisis, by a highly respectable 7 per cent-plus this year. A double-digit growth does not seem out of reach within the next four years. Economic growth is well supported by strong fundamentals. Gross domestic savings stood at 32.5 per cent of GDP in 2008-09, while the gross domestic capital formation was 34.9 per cent. This record places India on a par with the world's fastest growing economies. The outlook for foreign trade is improving with both world output and trade volumes picking up, though how fragile the recovery is remains unclear. The broad-based recovery creates room for a gradual roll-back of the stimulus offered over the last 18 months. Those measures are necessary to push the economy back into the higher growth trajectory.
Pegging the gross fiscal deficit at 6.5 per cent of the GDP for this year, the Survey has recommended replacing the current defective subsidy schemes that control the issue prices of food, fertilizer, diesel, and kerosene by a system that places money directly in the hands of the beneficiaries to be used for purchases in the open market. At present, while the high level of subsidies meant a major fiscal burden for the government and consequently curtailed the scope for public spending in critical areas such as poverty alleviation, the benefits do not get substantially passed on to the targeted sections of the population. According to the Survey, it is a mistake to assume that a subsidy scheme has to be coupled with price control. The best way to intervene is to help the poor directly instead of controlling the price. However, the government is unlikely to dismantle marketing subsidies soon, ignoring political opposition. The high consumer price inflation is a major worry and a political embarrassment as well. Ominously since December, the high food prices and the gradual hardening of non-administered fuel prices are getting transmitted to other non-food items, and they are very likely to push the inflation further over the next few months. Many of the Survey's policy prescriptions are not new but their emphasis at this point is certainly significant. It remains to be seen how exactly its hard-headed economic analysis is tempered by political realities in the Budget.
146) Sachin's summit
At a time when immediacy masquerades as relevance in sport, a nuanced understanding of true greatness evades us. It takes something as monumental as what Sachin Tendulkar achieved in Gwalior against a South African side of no little quality to prompt us to filter out the shrill absurdities and begin to examine the contours of real greatness. Tendulkar turns 37 in April — he has long passed the age when every failure a batsman suffers is investigated for evidence of fading eyesight and slowing reflexes. Yet he continues to confound us, constantly forcing us to review and revise the limiting parameters against which great batsmen — and indeed great athletes — are measured. No other Indian sportsperson has been quite as adept at pressing our awe-buttons as Tendulkar. The maestro's double-century, the first such instance in the 2962 One Day Internationals held so far, is significant at many levels. Every time a barrier is breached, every time something seems possible only in theory is realised, some of the patterns of collective mental conditioning are broken. Tendulkar, in achieving this feat of will and endurance in his 21st year of international cricket, has not merely exploded the myths common to ageing sportspersons; he has also shown again that longevity is the most functional of metrics in assessing greatness.
“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence then, is not an act, but a habit,” said Aristotle. It is a habit that few athletes have exemplified as well as Tendulkar for more than two decades. Sporting immortality is achieved by quickly erasing dark memories of the odd intimations of mortality. Even so great a batsman as Tendulkar has had his lows, and his lowest perhaps occurred when he was booed off his home ground, the Wankhede Stadium, in March 2006. But he has sparked a renaissance, batting on occasion without ego, playing a shrewder, safer game, but every so often reprising the rousing, intuitive style of his younger days. The last 12 months, in particular, have seen more of the latter: he has during this period made 10 international centuries, six in Tests and four in ODIs (including three scores of over 150); most of them have evoked a sense of glorious lightness. He has 93 international centuries, and if he progresses at the same rate, the staggering achievement of 100 centuries could be his by the end of the year. But numbers, however impressive, do not offer the measure of a man. These days Tendulkar is often asked what motivates him now that he has achieved nearly every batting record. His answer has always been the same: he loves the game. It is this simple, unaffected love that has allowed him to adorn cricket without appearing bigger than the game.
147) From roaring lion to timid mouse
Vidya Subrahmaniam
Indian Parliament is too tolerant of indiscipline and too intolerant of genuine dissent.
It is a brave Congressperson who will stand up and speak for freedom of expression. When that rare person happens to be a Lok Sabha MP as well as the party's spokesperson, his action deserves taking notice.
Manish Tewari recently moved a Private Member's Bill in the Lok Sabha seeking amendment in the Tenth Schedule (anti-defection law) of the Constitution. Reason: The law, while intending to stop the evil of defection, worked in practice against individual freedom and creative thinking. As he argued in an article, party whips compelled MPs to toe the line, resulting in a member “invariably voting for a bill if you are on the treasury benches and against a bill if you are in the opposition..”
Mr. Tewari's version of the law will free legislators from the whip-imposed fear of losing their membership in all cases except where the life of the government is seen to be threatened by a no-confidence motion, a money Bill or some crucial financial matters. It is a daring proposal. Yet fortunately for Mr. Tewari, it has some powerful backers, including the erudite Hamid Ansari. In a November 2009 public address, the Vice-President made a strong case for restricting the use of the whip in order to allow greater “room for political and policy expression in Parliament.” The cue was picked up a month later at a workshop organised by PRS Legislative Research where participants argued that the anti-defection law prevented MPs from critically examining government proposals.
There is an underlying irony in this. Indian Parliament in many ways mirrors Indian public life: Infuriatingly chaotic at one level and rigidly rule-bound at another. Parliament, as it exists today, is too tolerant of indiscipline and too intolerant of genuine dissent. A typical MP will be a roaring lion during zero and question hours and a timid mouse when bound by a whip.
Disruption has become so much a habit with our MPs that the only point of interest today is the form they will adopt on the floor of the House. The 2009 winter session witnessed an innovation that left Lok Sabha Speaker Meira Kumar metaphorically and literally speechless. The Opposition Bharatiya Janata Party abandoned walkouts and such for a low chant that apparently did not quite qualify as “disruption”, yet fairly drowned out Home Minister P. Chidambaram's reply to the debate on the Liberhan Commission report.
In itself a noisy, lively Parliament is not a bad thing; it could possibly be justified as the inevitable outcome of a democracy that is today more inclusive and more representative than any time previously. However, when indiscipline extends to all aspects of Parliament, it is time to worry. The 2009 winter session saw the sacrosanct question hour collapse because of the absence of as many as 28 questioners. Nearly half of all Bills piloted went through without even a semblance of discussion.
After every session, there is the unavoidable stock-taking: of hours lost to mayhem, of Bills passed in haste, of business left unfinished; of business interrupted because of a lack of quorum and so forth. At Speaker Kumar's initiative, the Rules Committee of the Lok Sabha has now made it mandatory for Ministers to give oral replies to questions even should the questioners be physically absent. The reform was perhaps necessary, and yet look at the leeway it allows truant legislators: MPs who have questions to ask can now legitimately bunk question hour. Question hour is held sacred not for mechanistically supplying answers to questions but because it affords an opportunity to members to cross examine the government and hold it to account.
In the United Kingdom, for instance, the Prime Minister takes questions every Wednesday. This practice was introduced in 1961 and has since become a responsibility no head of government can escape. The MPs relish grilling the Prime Minister, though with characteristic English restraint, and for the media and the general public it is an event they eagerly look forward to.
Just where Indian parliamentary priorities stand can be seen from the following. The first budget session of the 13th Lok Sabha spent 30 hours and 45 minutes on the general budget, 23 hours on questions and 63 hours on disruptions. The first budget session of the 14th Lok Sabha spent 19 hours 21 minutes on the general budget, 5 hours 49 minutes on questions and 47 hours on disruptions. By comparison the first budget session of the 15th Lok Sabha would seem impressive: 50 hours on the budget, 20 hours on questions and 23 hours and 45 minutes on interruptions. Yet by winter, the House had returned so vigorously to form that a distressed Ms Kumar had to call a closure earlier than scheduled.
A recent analysis by PRS Legislative Research encapsulates the decline of Parliament. As against 151 sittings in 1956, the Lok Sabha met 46 days and 64 days respectively in 2008 and 2009. Time spent on discussing the budget has reduced from 123 hours in the 1950s to an average of 34 hours in the past decade. (Standing Committees constituted to lower the budget burden are plagued by poor attendance). Last year witnessed a total of 1,100 starred questions (questions orally answered by Ministers). Of these only 266 (24 per cent) were called, and of the 266 questions called, the inquiring MP was not present for 57. Of a total of 30 non-financial Bills passed in 2009, eight were passed in less than five minutes.
Indian disrespect to Parliament cuts across parties and extends all the way up — from greenhorn legislators to parliamentary veterans to House leaders who, while making a show of being alarmed at the deteriorating quality of Parliamentary participation, will do little to enforce discipline. Parliamentarian par excellence Atal Bihari Vajpayee has time and again bemoaned Parliament's fall from grace. He commemorated India's 50th year of Independence by calling Parliament a “fish market.” He wished he could withdraw his membership from it. Yet the party he led to two consecutive victories behaved abominably in defeat. Today the only thing the 2004 July-August Budget session is remembered for is the BJP's unceasing bad manners.
During the budget session of the 15th Lok Sabha, Chairperson of the Congress Parliamentary Party Sonia Gandhi pulled up partypersons for taking Parliament lightly, and reminded them that the institution symbolised the will of the people. Her own record is hardly exemplary. In the 14th Lok Sabha: 36 per cent overall attendance, participation in only three debates and zero utilisation of question hour. In the 15th Lok Sabha so far: 61 per cent overall attendance, zero participation in debates, and zero utilisation of question hour.
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is an attentive and conscientious parliamentarian — but only when he is in India which is increasingly not the case. The Prime Minister made three foreign trips over 13 days during the 21-day 2009 winter session. Prime Ministerial travels are a necessary part of diplomacy; and indeed India's current international profile owes much to Dr. Singh's energetic overseas engagements. However, the Prime Minister unwittingly sets an example when he takes leave of absence from Parliament. In 2007, Speaker Somanth Chatterjee issued a diktat against MPs travelling abroad during session. He also wrote to Prime Minister Singh asking that no Minister travel abroad without the chair's express permission. The United Progressive Alliance government ignored the entreaties only to be confronted by the spectre of ministerial absence during a vital moment in the first Budget session of its second term: A Bill emanating from the Commerce Ministry had to go back because Ministers Anand Sharma and Jyotiraditya Scindia were both travelling.
It does not require much to change all this. A signal from the top is often enough. During the recent Lok Sabha debate on the Right to Education Bill, a sudden buzz had it that Ms Gandhi would take the floor in a gesture of support to the historic legislation. Congress MPs dutifully scurried to the House only to learn that they had overeagerly responded to a rumour. Within minutes the House emptied out! No show by the leader and no show by the herd.
Successive Speakers have sought to take control only to give up in the end. The lasting image of Speaker Chatterjee is of a man in deep distress, his throat raspy from shouting, his drooped shoulders a testimony to a disorder beyond repair. A “no work, no pay” solution proposed by Mr. Chatterjee predictably found no takers, except for those on the Left. Presiding Officers have pushed for reform at numerous redressal conferences and meetings — again to no avail.
Should Manish Tewari succeed, Indian Parliamentarians will be spared the repeated torture of changing from roaring lion, when not in a voting capacity, to timid mouse, when called upon to vote. Ideally, they ought to be neither. They need to be less shrill and more disciplined outside of their voting duties, and they need to be more vocal when taking a position on policy. This is the way it is in other democracies. This is the way it should be here.
148) Sheikh Mabarak: an appreciation
Pranay Gupte
Sheikh Mabarak, who died on Wednesday, was for Emiratis the embodiment of the values of adventure and equitable development on which the nation was built.
— Photo: WMA
Sheikh Mabarak bin Mohammed Al Nahayan befriended Indians who came to the UAE to participate in the huge task of nation building in the 1970s.
He was the last of the giants, those tough men of the Bedouin desert who formed a new nation out of a harsh environment, those visionaries who created a country that would occupy a special place in the global firmament.
Sheikh Mabarak bin Mohammed Al Nahayan, who died on Wednesday, occupied a special place himself in the hearts of fellow Emiratis. He was the first Minister of the Interior of the United Arab Emirates and he helped start and sustain what is arguably one of the foremost security infrastructures in the world. Even before his federal role, which began when the UAE was established in December 1971, Emiratis knew him as the head of the Abu Dhabi Police, which he established in 1961. Most of all, they knew him for his dazzling smile and his endearing warmth, and they knew him for being accessible at all times.
They knew him, too, for befriending Indians who had started to come to the UAE to participate in what seemed to be an implausible task of nation building at the time. He nurtured those friendships, even when he was felled by a stroke in1979; his grateful Indian friends — such as the Sindhi businessman Mohan Jashanmal — would visit him virtually every day at his majlis.
I, too, was among those privileged to be welcomed to his majlis in Abu Dhabi. Tea and coffee would be served and on a high-definition TV screen, photographs of the evolution of the UAE from a desert territory to a modern nation would roll. Some of them depicted Sheikh Mabarak as a young man — tall, almost statuesque, fiercely handsome, possessing a chiselled face that, of course, always seemed to be smiling.
His long illness may have sapped his strength — but not his spirit. He held out his hand for all visitors, gripping theirs firmly, and imbued them with his special energy. I always touched his feet when I met him: how could I not? He was, after all, a living legend. Sheikh Mabarak was the embodiment of the enduring values of adventure and equitable development on which this remarkable nation has been built.
He was also the UAE's unsung hero; his close friends, Sheikh Zayed and Sheikh Rashid, are widely recognised as the UAE's founders. But, in his own unobtrusive way, Sheikh Mabarak was right there with them, constantly consulted by both men, their respect for one another deepening with every incremental stride that the Emirates took toward social and economic progress.
Those photographs in Sheikh Mabarak's majlis capture some of the regard those extraordinary men had for one another — their body language tells a special story of joy in seeing an ancient society make the transition to a technologically driven state. They speak of the founders' own proud wonder at seeing their children and grandchildren grow up in a far more hospitable environment than that of their youth, one that opened endless possibilities for competing in the global commons with the skills bestowed by education and enterprise.
Sheikh Mabarak encouraged the promotion of those skills, just as his son does so vigorously now. The son I am referring to is Sheikh Nahayan Mabarak Al Nahayan, the UAE's Minister of Higher Education and Scientific Research. He, too, is a living legend.
He is that not only for his stellar record in education and science. Sheikh Nahayan's devotion to his father in itself constitutes a legend. Ever since an accident in London incapacitated his father — and that was more than 30 years ago — Sheikh Nahayan tended to his father in a way that was preternatural, in a way that went way beyond anything demanded by filial duty. He would rise with his father for prayers at dawn, he would have breakfast with his father, he would join his father for his majlis. And then, before the sun had set, Sheikh Nahayan would himself drive his father around Abu Dhabi.
Watching father and son together in such tenderness, it was impossible not to be moved, it was impossible not to reflect on the meaning of that most atavistic of relationships.
The nexus between father and son had a common narrative besides their dedication to their beloved country. That other narrative encompassed their generous view of Indians and other subcontinentals as being integral to the prosperity and progress of the United Arab Emirates. It would be fair to say that in a nation whose leaders have always welcomed men and women from South Asia, Sheikh Mabarak and Sheikh Nahayan offered a unique hospitality.
That is why Sheikh Mabarak is being mourned not only in this nation on the Arabian littoral. The prayers are also resonating elsewhere in the region, and in lands just three hours away, places familiar to both father and son from their many visits.
Those prayers are of grief, of course, and they ask for salvation for Sheikh Mabarak's soul. But they are also prayers celebrating a man who led a long and full life, a man who left many smiles over many miles, a giant who dreamed of an entire new society and lived to see it happen during his lifetime. They are prayers celebrating a man of tolerance who showed that whatever one's faith, a warm welcome to strangers almost always results in enduring friendships. I will miss his majlis, and I will miss that smile.
(Pranay Gupte's forthcoming book is on India and the Middle East.)
149) Dreaming of a chance for peace
V.R. Krishna Iyer
The latest round of India-Pakistan talks represents a major opportunity to both countries to put in place a new bilateral architecture.
The India-Pakistan discord and the repeated armed conflicts between the two countries have stemmed chiefly from the accession to India of the state of Kashmir. The strife has caused a heavy drain of human and financial resources over the years, including in Jammu and Kashmir itself. We must halt the disaster and end the recurring loss of life and property that has been occurring. False prestige should not stop an exploration of all possible solutions to find a dignified resolution. Every available proposal should be discussed in a spirit of honour. And, meanwhile, there should be no begging for arms by either country. Both are nuclear-capable and may be tempted to use the weapons in a crisis. There is possibly enough nuclear weapon capability to destroy all of Asia that the two countries have.
Statesmen from both sides have repeatedly spoken out on the potential havoc involved and projected a vision for peace. Superficial solutions or talks will not work. Both countries will have to go to the root of the problem and seek an understanding.
Religion is the cause of the dispute. Pakistan is an Islamic Republic and India is secular. Both were one before the two-nation theory gained acceptance. The British Parliament recognised India and Pakistan as separate sovereign nations. Kashmir was at that time a separate entity. There is no sign of peace now; in fact, every available sign points to aggravating discord over a land of enchanting beauty.
If Asia is to enjoy real peace, this dispute has to be resolved. If Asia has no comity, world peace itself is at stake. Neither the U.N. Security Council nor any statesman with vision has taken positive measures to end this bleeding battle. Curiously, the leaders of both countries do not want other states to intervene and negotiate a settlement on fair terms.
Luckily, a historic moment has arrived. The Prime Ministers of both countries agreed to hold bilateral talks without reservations, with the objective of restoring cordial relations. Exploring the possibilities of a peaceful settlement is a task that could spell a supreme patriotic service.
It is imperative that the war of words over J&K should stop and a happy and just resolution achieved. An ad hoc and tentative package for discussion among the peoples of both sides and nations is overdue: without it, peace will remain a dream and a solution an illusion.
Kashmir was under a Hindu maharaja who ruled a large number of Muslim subjects and a micro-minority of Pandits. Jurisprudentially, therefore, J&K belongs to the Indian Republic. The maharaja decided to join India. Sheikh Abdullah, the head of the National Conference, endorsed the accession. But Pakistan, a cultural victim of communal bigotry and obdurate obscurantism (India is not far behind, either) invaded a part of J&K claiming it to be a Muslim-dominated state and saying that it should go to Pakistan.
Is world jurisprudence communal? If the present “line of actual control” gets international recognition and there are socialist secular democratic governments on either side of it, there can be peace and a permanent end to war between the two countries. The violent territories bleeding daily, leading to armed conflict and carnage, cannot be sustained. Humanity the world over will treat peace in J&K as a secular wonder. From a brave new Bharat and a peaceful Pakistan, a new socio-political secular philosophy will emerge to mark a modern and dynamic era of majestic concord. A civilised and humane world order will then be the epic accomplishment of the 21st century.
Can we have race or colour dividing the world, making the globe white or yellow or dark-brown? And now religion is taking on the role of ensuring the collapse of humanism in the name of god fighting another god, making mankind a casualty. J&K is symbolic of all these divisive forces.
To be a member of a secular confederation should not cause any infraction of sovereignty. It will merely be an expression of willingness to be humane in the process of forming a collective consent to act together, not against one another. A confederation will represent a public political accord, a liberal organisation to bury discord or hostility but agreeing to be allied in foreign relations, never to have a mutual armed conflict. It will mark the beginning of a friendly formation of two or more sovereign states to shed hostilities and be willing to act as comrades.
From a historical perspective, India and Pakistan have so much in common. In geographical terms both were one. In material matters the two have religious bonds. India has more Muslims than Pakistan, and shrines for them to worship. There are common economic interests. The respective economies can go forward as a single integral whole, complementing each other.
My solemn proposal is to begin with a resolution that all Indians and Pakistanis believe in the worship of all versions of god in deep devotion. Let all noble negotiations be founded on a spiritual basis, not on mundane arms-dealing on a communal bedrock, but Advaita-Islamic divine inspiration. This is a unique opportunity. Our peoples are allies.
Let the conscience of the Buddha's renunciation and compassion be the basis of a settlement. Emperor Asoka put an end to war and pleaded for religious fellowship as a greater asset than victory. Renounce, unite not split. Two sovereign nations, but a dynamic togetherness.
The Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan should become the leaders of an Indo-Pakistan Friendship Society. It will make for a glorious start. All political parties should be invited to become its members. The two, like all great statesmen, should practise Asoka's creed.
The two countries should realise the extent of human loss that will come about if the confrontation continued. The Taliban, that wicked terrorist force of fanaticism, although altogether un-Islamic, has become a source of terrorism in both countries. Islam and Advaita win by faith, not guns. Islam is peace, humanism, not terrorism or bigotry.
Our resources are common. Rivers and the territorial nexus make us one. Our languages have much in common. Our culture and economy will prosper, given unity. Varanasi has its mosques. There are temples, churches and mosques standing in friendly proximity in Kerala. In Hyder Ali's part of Mysore State there is a great mosque and a great temple in a sanctified neighbourhood.
Why, then, should we not live united? Islam stands for world brotherhood, and Advaita with the same semantic profundity stands for one creation. It follows that we fight in the name of Allah and Siva and blaspheme both. Gods are one but their priests with basic obscurantism battle for more power and followers. This is sacrilege and betrayal. Sri Narayana Guru, the great revolutionary of Kerala, was a global humanist. One of his credos was to ignore religious and caste distinctions. And he had as disciples Muslims and Hindus of all castes. He installed a few temples. The festivals were open equally to Muslims, Christians and others.
Whenever a Muslim in Pakistan dies of a bullet injury I breathe in pain. We are brothers, and every Hindu is his brother's keeper, be he Muslim or Christian. There is no reason we should not have a large and powerful movement for human rights and peace among Pakistanis and Indians.
Indo-Pakistan cultural friendship and political amity has to become a people's movement. Jinnah, the first President of Pakistan, was secular, every cell of his: he was western in outlook and allergic to the religious life. He was driven to the Muslim League by the Congress' tactless politics. Later, of course, he had political reasons for the way he went. His first message to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan was indeed beautiful and secular.
Let Indo-Pakistan comradeship be a popular passion to fight the cult of hate. Either you continue to be poor colonies of the White House or be together as powerful Asian allies.
If need be, set up a common Indo-Pakistan Supreme Court. It will be a great idea to have once in two or three years a three-month-long sitting of an India-Pakistan Parliament. Let there be also a Common Defence Force.
We will enjoy a grand Indo-Pakistan Federation. It will be a superlative political experiment: never to kill, only to salvage. It will represent a new sublime world order. Humanity will bless this century if such a federation is created.
The bilateral dream sequence is endless. A new oath, a new capital, a new Indo-Pakistan wonder with universal impact abjuring the nuclear menace. A new oath for judges and officers should state that they would uphold Indo-Pakistan friendship. In cricket, football and hockey there will be only be an Indo-Pakistan team, not separate teams. No visas, only fraternity between the two countries. In the field of education, common examinations are possible. Common hospitals, why not? J&K could then be a part of Indo-Pakistan territory. All from both countries will be free to enter and exit sans visa. Let there be one Federation.
150) Google stands firm amid complaints in Europe
James Kanter
Facing a new wave of antitrust complaints in Europe, Google stood firm on Wednesday, saying it would not offer concessions to companies that have accused it of abusing its market power in online searches and advertising.
Google said it was preparing a response to questions sent by European antitrust regulators after the antitrust accusations from three companies, including a unit of its archrival, Microsoft. “We haven't done anything wrong,” said Julia Holtz, the senior competition counsel for Google. As a result, she said, the company did not consider it necessary to offer “any sort of commitment” in response to the complaints.
The complaints to the European Commission indicate rising frustration among competitors with Google's strength in the online advertising business and with its business practices.
Market share
In some European countries, Google has more than 80 per cent of the market for Internet searches and advertising linked to them.
European Commission officials have said in the past, however, that market dominance was not, in and of itself, sufficient cause for antitrust sanctions.
Antitrust experts said that Google's decision to publicise the complaints itself showed the company's determination to try to stop the case before it advanced any further. — New York Times News Service
151)Charting an achievable road map
Ashok Dasgupta
The Finance Minister faces the conflicting objectives of sustaining stimulus-aided growth and ushering in fiscal consolidation.
________________________________________
Mr. Mukherjee may hike the excise duty and widen the service tax base to peg both levies at 10 p.c.
He may not find it difficult to peg the fiscal deficit at about 5.5 p.c. of the GDP in 2011-12
________________________________________
If the key macro policy objectives of the last Union budget were to combat the slowdown in the wake of the global financial crisis and stimulate economic growth at whatever cost — even at the expense of an “unsustainably high fiscal” deficit — the prime task before Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee for the new fiscal appears more challenging.
In his budget presentation today, the Congress-led UPA government's “man for all seasons” has to chart an achievable road map to sustain the stimulus-aided recovery momentum for taking the economy to a higher growth trajectory and, at the same time, usher in fiscal consolidation while ensuring that the inflationary spiral, especially of essential food items, is contained at tolerable levels.
On the face of it, the objectives are at conflict with each other.
For, if public spending is controlled along with a rollback of consumer-oriented stimulus measures, economic growth may get stymied.
On the contrary, if the stimulus measures continue, they may further stoke inflation, led by a further rise in food prices, and seep into manufacturing inflation and thereby invite monetary measures by way of higher interest rates. What renders the budgetary task harder for Mr. Mukherjee is the fact that the fast turnaround in the economy in the current fiscal has raised official hopes — as per the Economic Survey — of well over eight per cent growth in 2010-11. And this, when the rising growth trend has primarily been owing to the four fiscal packages accounting for an overall stimulus of nearly Rs.2,18,000 crore. The major stimuli which boosted consumer demand and led to a surprisingly better-than-expected industrial growth and consequent GDP (gross domestic product) expansion were the hugely increased public spending on infrastructure and other social sectors that led to a net market borrowing by the Centre of Rs.3,97,957 crore coupled with sharp cuts in excise duty from 14 to eight per cent and in service tax from 12 to 10 per cent.
Economic stimulus
Now that the economy is on a much firmer footing, will the Finance Minister roll back the fiscal stimulus measures? Economic analysts, including the Prime Minister's Economic Advisory Council (PMEAC), have suggested at least a partial rollback, starting the new fiscal itself, which has been ratified by the Survey. Though now reconciled to a nominal hike, India Inc. is of the view that the high growth is restricted to select sectors and, therefore, the incentives should stay for some more time to pre-empt another slowdown.
Considering that Mr. Mukherjee himself has reiterated time and again that the stimulus would stay until the global economies recover and domestic growth becomes deep-rooted, the middle path he may adopt is to hike the excise duty by two percentage points in certain sectors and widen the service tax base to peg both levies at 10 per cent. The calibrated approach would be more as part of the transition to the combined Goods and Services Tax (GST), which is now likely to be implemented from 2011-12 instead of the original deadline of April 1, 2010.
With the reform in direct taxes by way of implementation of the Direct Taxes Code (DTC) also proposed from 2011-12, the Minister is not expected to tinker much with personal and corporate taxation. However, a customary increase of Rs.10,000-15,000 in the basic exemption limit for individual taxpayers is on the cards to make up for the burden of food inflation, while corporates may look forward to some changes in the surcharge. As at least nine aspects of the DTC draft provisions are currently under scrutiny, the budget is unlikely to upset the simplification that is sought to be ushered in until the hitches are sorted out.
Targeted spending
Also, having increased spending allocations much beyond fiscal prudence during the current year, Mr. Mukherjee is expected to ensure that public expenditure is targeted better at the intended beneficiaries as the delivery mechanism has a lot of room for improvement. This would include better targeting of various subsidies so as to contain expenditure, especially when the PMEAC has pointed out that the spending has been more on consumption than asset building. While a beginning has already been made with a cut in fertilizer subsidy by way of the nutrient-based scheme, such a move does not seem possible on the Kirit Parikh panel recommendations on petroleum fuel pricing and deregulation in view of the vehement opposition and the chances of inflation being fuelled further.
A decision on this is expected to be taken outside the budget and at a time when international oil prices soften as the Survey also makes no mention in this regard. As for the reduction in fiscal deficit, there are, as Mr. Mukherjee himself pointed out last year, quite a few positive factors. Pay Commission arrears are out of the way and neither will there be the burden of farm loan waiver during the coming fiscal. These, coupled with the higher than expected growth, will lead to a significant reduction from 6.8 per cent of the GDP this fiscal. Apart from these factors, the 3G auctions are expected to fetch Rs.30,000-35,000 crore, while the listing of profitable enterprises during the year may fetch about Rs.25,000-30,000 crore. All these taken together, it may not be difficult for Mr. Mukherjee to peg the fiscal deficit at about 5.5 per cent of the GDP in 2011-12.
However, the ifs and buts remain. Even as the government adheres to a disinvestment road map, much would depend on the sentiment on the bourses which, in turn, is dependent on the pace of global recovery.
Mr. Mukherjee's objective of people's partnership in public undertakings may not happen if retail investors' response remains as lukewarm as it has been in recent times. Also, on the domestic front, the stock market, according to analysts, would watch out for the extent of market borrowings by the government during the year.
In case the borrowings are larger than market expectations, the sentiment would be negative which, in turn, would affect the disinvestment programme.
Corrections and Clarifications
• A pointer in the graphic “Highlights of Railway Budget 2010-11” (February 25, 2010, page 1) was “Rs. 41,426 crore outlay proposed; allocation for new lines increased to Rs. 2,848 crore from Rs. 4,411 crore.” The figures were interchanged and it should have said “… increased to Rs. 4,411 crore from Rs. 2,848 crore”.
• Mr. S.S. Palanimanickam is the Minister of State in the Ministry of Finance. The caption of the PTI photograph that went with a report “Economy will sustain momentum next fiscal” (“Business” page, February 25, 2010) called him as “Minister of State for Revenue”.
• The caption of the photograph that went with a report “5 militants killed in Sopore gun battle” (February 24, 2010) was “An armyman stands guard near ....” A few readers point out that the jawan is wearing a helmet usually used by the police and paramilitary forces, while the colour of the armoured vehicle is blue which is the CRPF colour. The caption should have said “CRPF jawan”.
It is the policy of The Hindu to correct significant errors as soon as possible. Please specify the edition (place of publication), date and page.
The Readers' Editor's office can be contacted by
Telephone: +91-44-28418297/28576300 (11 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday to Friday);
Fax: +91-44-28552963;
E-mail: readerseditor@thehindu.co.in
Mail: Readers' Editor, The Hindu, Kasturi Buildings,
859 & 860 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002, India.
All communication must carry the full postal address and telephone number.
No personal visits.
The Terms of Reference for the Readers' Editor are on www.thehindu.com
152) A delicate balance
Union Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee's strategy of a partial rollback of the fiscal stimulus package in his Budget is not without its risks, given particularly the uncertainty over the external environment. Yet it is a measure of the government's confidence that the move to a higher growth path of 7.2 per cent this year and to a projected 8.2 per cent next year is sustainable even in the absence of the stimulus that it has reversed course and sought to raise Rs.46,500 crore through indirect taxes. Though this is offset partially by the direct tax concessions totalling Rs.26,000 crore, the net revenue raised, together with the expected buoyancy in a year of robust growth, has enabled the Finance Minister to keep the fiscal deficit down to 5.5 per cent next year. The real story of this budget then is not of any big idea or innovative strategy, but one of fiscal consolidation. There is the recognition that a sound and prudent fiscal management — with the deficits under control, and subject to gradual and targeted reduction over the medium term — has provided an enabling environment for the move on to a high growth trajectory. In a milieu where fiscal consolidation would be impossible while simultaneously increasing social sector spending and holding taxes down, the tax area had inevitably to yield. Overall, while an additional tax burden of Rs.20,500 crore is not too much for the economy to absorb, the impact of specific increases as, for instance, on diesel and petrol — the main target of protest by the opposition — is bound to be reflected in the price level.
Structural reform of the income tax system has been delayed with the new income tax code still in its formative stage. Meanwhile, income tax payers have gained significant relief from the broadening of the income slabs and from tax deductions for investing in infrastructure bonds and contributing to the Central Government Health Scheme. The cut in the surcharge on corporate tax from 10 per cent to 7.5 per cent is balanced with the raising of the minimum alternate tax to 18 per cent. Among the specific sectors, real estate that has been hit the most by the slowdown has been provided some concession. So have the medical equipment and mobile phone manufacturers, and the cinema industry. The restoration of the general excise duty to its original level of 10 per cent and of the duty on large cars and multi-utility vehicles from 20 per cent to 22 per cent would not be much of a burden. More significant from the point of view of impact are the revival of the customs duty of 5 per cent on crude and of 10 per cent on petroleum products and the hike in the excise duty on petrol and diesel by Re. one a litre. Even while it is reluctant to decide on raising the prices of petroleum products as recommended by the Kirit Parikh Committee, it has collected more in taxes and may well let the oil companies live with under-recoveries of the product prices.
As in the earlier budgets, much of the focus on the expenditure side is on social sector spending that now accounts for 37 per cent of the total plan outlay for 2010-11, while another 25 per cent is to be spent on rural infrastructure. The United Progressive Alliance's flagship Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme has been allotted Rs.40,100 crore and the Bharat Nirman programme of building rural infrastructure Rs. 48,000 crore. In addition, the allocations for health and housing — rural and urban — have been increased. Higher allocations are no doubt needed in all these sectors, but what is missing is the effort to strengthen the delivery mechanism at the ground level though the institutional weaknesses in the government structure have been identified over and over again. The suggestion made in the Economic Survey for moving away from subsidising the foodgrain prices in the public distribution system and instead providing coupons directly to the families below the poverty line so that they can buy food from the open market is no doubt too radical for the budget. Yet, in the case of fertilizers, the government has adopted the nutrient-based subsidy scheme and it even talks of moving towards a system of direct payment of subsidies to the farmers. This is an area in which it has to move with caution lest the inevitable increase in fertilizer prices should prompt the farmers to use less of the nutrients, thereby affecting farm production. The right to education bill passed last year is still to make its impact felt and the Finance Minister has increased the allocation for upgrading the quality of school education, to which every child in the 6-14 age group would be entitled. The right to food, the big idea that emerged from the last budget, is still in its formative stage, with the draft bill almost ready for circulation and debate. The government's dilemma on how inclusive that right should be — whether to adopt the conventional poverty line with its lower figure of poverty or the higher estimates that expert committees have come up with more recently — and the attendant cost seem to be holding back its roll out.
Notable in this budget are the moves on reforming the financial sector. New banking licences are to be issued by the Reserve Bank and eligible non-bank finance companies are to be allowed to convert themselves into banks. The global financial crisis has shown up the systemic weaknesses of financial regulatory institutions the world over. Drawing a lesson from this experience of the advanced financial markets, the Finance Minister has proposed a Financial Stability and Development Council to exercise macro prudential supervision over the economy including over large financial conglomerates, and to coordinate the functioning of multiple regulatory agencies. Overall, the budget has had a positive impact on business sentiment and the animal spirits of the market.
Corrections and Clarifications
The second paragraph of "A delicate balance" (Editorial, February 27, 2010) was ". The restoration of the general excise duty to its original level of 10 per cent and of the duty on large cars and multi-utility vehicles from 20 per cent to 22 per cent would not be much of a burden." The General excise duty increased by just two percentage points from eight to 10 per cent. The original level is 14 per cent. The Finance Minister announced only a "partial roll-back".
153) The wrong way for rural doctors
Anbumani Ramadoss
The proposal to introduce a shortened medical course is a folly: it will aggravate the rural-urban divide and give a raw deal to villages.
The proposal put forward by the Central government to introduce a shortened medical course at the graduate level to serve the rural areas will only widen the rural-urban divide and impede India's role as an emerging global power. In seeking to virtually revive the Licentiate Medical Practitioners (LMP) scheme that was available before Independence, the government has taken a regressive step. And in the process it is resorting to discrimination against rural folk, who are taken for second-grade citizens deserving medical care by a brigade of ‘qualified quacks'.
The scheme involves a three-and-a-half year course that leads to a bachelor's degree in medicine and surgery. Doctors trained under this scheme will work in rural areas. They will be trained in district hospitals.
In the erstwhile LMP scheme, students were trained for around three years, awarded a diploma and asked to meet rural health care needs. It was considered a way to bridge the gap between demand and supply outside metropolitan India. The LMPs outnumbered the MBBS graduates and largely served in the rural areas. Following the Bhore Committee report of 1946, medical courses were unified into the standard five-and-a-half-year MBBS degree.
The issue is the impact of this scheme on the status of the rural Indian. In what way are rural Indians different from their urban counterparts? Do they deserve health care from medical personnel who are less qualified than those who attend to the health needs of their urban brothers? Are their well-being and lives less important than those in urban areas? This discrimination could sow the seeds of disunity and discrimination. The scheme is against the spirit of the Constitution and human rights.
The proposal is superfluous, too. Any State can introduce a short-term medical course. We do not need a centralised concept of rural service, governed by the likes of the Medical Council of India (MCI).
The need is to utilise existing personnel prudently. Today even medical colleges recognised by the MCI, numbering about 300, face faculty shortage. How is the government planning to equip the so-called rural-based institutions that will eventually churn out semi-qualified medical personnel, with faculty and infrastructure?
India has a wealth of alternative medical systems such as Ayurveda, Siddha, Unani, Homeopathy and so on, that brings in hundreds of thousands of qualified medical professionals into the health care industry. They qualify after more than four years of training. It would be easier to use this huge corps of medical manpower according to the needs of the local regions rather than create a new cadre.
Today a nurse undergoes four years of training during her or his course, whereas the proposed BRMS course is for three and a half years. The rural folk would be better off being catered to by nurse-practitioners who are more qualified than the ‘qualified quacks.'
The doctor-patient ratio in India is 1:1,700. Add to this the doctors under the traditional medical systems and the ratio comes down to about 1:700. The World Health Organisation's recommended criterion is 1:300. To reach that target, we cannot go for short-sighted and short-term measures to create a cadre of semi-qualified professionals.
We have the schemes and tools to enhance the health of our rural fellow-beings. With an exemplary scheme like the National Rural Health Mission, all that is needed is to revive and give new momentum to such schemes.
There are more than a million fully trained nurses and more than 3,00,000 Auxiliary Nurse Midwives in India. There are also more than 7,00,000 Accredited Social Health Activists (ASHAs). Then there are Village Health Nurses, Male Health Workers, Male Nurses, Anganwadi workers and so on. There is no dearth of paramedical professionals and qualified medical personnel to serve the districts and villages.
Adding one more cadre of workers who are neither here nor there will lead to state- acknowledged quackery. Already, nearly 75 per cent of India's population is treated by quacks. The proposal will only help strengthen the cause of the quacks, bestowing upon them respectability.
Already the urban-rural disparity in health infrastructure is huge. If the rural areas are catered to by BRMS personnel, it will deter qualified and experienced doctors from taking up rural assignments. It was after much thinking and cajoling that we put forward a compulsory scheme for rural service for those who desire to pursue higher medical courses. With one imprudent and rash gesture, we will do away with a good practice that was initiated with astute planning.
Ghulam Nabi Azad, my successor Union Minister of Health and Family Welfare, says BRMS personnel can be posted in Sub-Health Centres and Primary Health Centres. These already have more than enough qualified nurses who have completed four-year courses and done their practical training. So where is the need for a BRMS course that will produce medical personnel dismally equipped with only three and a half years of training?
The website of the Union Health Ministry provides details about the NRHM. Thousands of crores of rupees are being invested in the rural health sector under the NRHM to strengthen rural infrastructure. As Health Minister, in order to supplement the NRHM, I initiated a proposal for a one-year compulsory rural posting for each MBBS doctor after the internship. This faced stiff resistance from medical students. A committee under Dr. Sambasiva Rao was formed to deliberate on this issue around the country and give their recommendations. Finally, the recommendation was that anybody who aspired for a post-graduate degree should undergo a one-year compulsory rural posting. Unfortunately this recommendation came at the fag end of my tenure. Had this been implemented, every year we would get nearly 30,000 fully qualified doctors working in Rural Health Centres.
The need is to start more medical colleges in areas such as the northeast, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Jharkhand. The country has nearly 300 colleges, of which 190 are in Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Gujarat. Uttar Pradesh, with a population of 19 crores, has only about 16 colleges. Bihar, with a population of nine crores, has eight. Rajasthan with an eight-crore population has eight and Madhya Pradesh, with a population of eight crores, has 12. If the State governments open medical colleges in all the districts, we can have nearly 600 medical colleges, rolling out nearly 75,000 MBBS graduates a year.
We have another huge health resource pool to tap from: doctors trained in Russia and China. Their services can be utilised in the rural areas.
Many doctors settle abroad. The government should take steps to prevent this drain by offering them attractive remuneration, avenues to train and upgrade knowledge and due recognition.
One school of thought favours admitting two batches of medical students in each institution every year – in the morning and in the afternoon. Clinical sessions could be alternated. By resorting to the double shift, we can double the number of medical graduates using the same infrastructure and faculty. This can be followed for medical, dental and nursing courses. This was accepted by the MCI for post-graduate courses when I put forward the suggestion that accommodates one more student per professor within the existing system, given the infrastructure available. Earlier one professor could take in only one postgraduate student; now one professor can take in two students without compromising on the quality of medical education, thereby doubling the intake of students to postgraduate courses, leading to optimum use of the existing resources and infrastructure.
My suggestions in a nutshell are here. Make one-year rural posting compulsory for all MBBS doctors after internship. State governments should start medical colleges in every district to create more medical graduates. Increase the number of medical graduates and post-graduates using the existing infrastructure and faculty. Focus more on the northern and northeastern States. Expand and invest more in the National Rural Health Mission. Start government-run nursing colleges in all districts. Public-Private partnership ventures can be initiated, using the district and sub-district government hospitals for the purpose. Preference should be given to students from rural areas for admission to the MBBS courses, and it should be stipulated that the graduates work for five to 10 years in rural areas. The harmonisation and utilisation of doctors who have been trained in Russia and China, who have undergone seven-year MBBS courses, to fit into the rural programmes could help. The utilisation of doctors from traditional systems for specific needs and programmes could be planned. Anyone who wants to join a post-graduate course in a government college should have done a minimum of three years in a rural posting.
154) How the experts have been fooled
S. Gurumurthy
The Finance Minister's budget speech intends to conceal more than it reveals.
“The Finance Minister has done a fantastic job.” “Very good budget.” “See the takeaways.” “See the positives.” “Fiscal deficit controlled to 5.5 per cent.” “Government borrowings reduced to just Rs. 3.45 lakh crores.” “Road map laid for oil sector reform.” “Infrastructure boosted.” “Consumer demand to rise on tax cuts.” “Bonanza for the middle class.” “Yet an inclusive budget.” “ I would give 10 on 10 for the Budget” …
Thus went the comments even as this writer was browsing through the Budget papers running to hundreds of pages to see what the Finance Minister had left unsaid in his speech. Those who eulogised the Budget and the Finance Minister seemed to have nothing in their hands other than what he claimed in his speech, and most of them would not have had even a cursory glance at the Budget papers which were put on the website almost an hour after the speech concluded.
Thanks to the euphoria of the experts, the Sensex rose by 400 points by the time the speech ended. But as the facts contained in the Budget documents were slowly becoming known, the Sensex was moderated, with the rise being confined to 175 points by the close of the day. But the Budget and the Finance Minister had won approval thanks to the well-structured speech that was long on words — including quotes from Kautilya — and hugely short on numbers. By now, taking the Finance Minister's words as gospel truth, the opinion of ‘elite India' has been sealed in favour of the Budget. Of course, the ‘other India' has no instant opinion to express; already reeling under high inflation, to counter which there is no measure in the Finance Minister's speech, it has only to experience in the days to come what the Budget will actually do to them. Look at the facts and numbers that lie buried in the documents.
Examine the claim that it is an inclusive Budget. The additional provision for rural development is just Rs. 3,936 crore — a rise from Rs. 62,201 crore in the current year to Rs. 66,137 crore for the coming year. This translates to a rise of 6.3 per cent for the coming year over the current year. The estimated rise in GDP for the coming year over the current year is estimated at 12.5 per cent. It means the rural sector does not even get half the rise in the country's prosperity in the coming year. The rise in the allocation for the MGNREGS in the coming year is just 2.5 per cent. Contrast this with the rise by – believe it – 146 per cent in the MGNREGS for 2009-10 over 2008-9. The tax cut for the middle class amounts to some five times the extra provision for rural development. Still the Budget is claimed as being an aam aadmi effort.
Move on. The additional provision for agriculture is a pittance — Rs. 900 crore. So much for the Finance Minister's claim of inclusive growth. So, what was an inclusive agenda in budgets from 2004 onwards and until the last Budget seems to have become a mere slogan. The Finance Minister was unconcerned about how the stock markets reacted to his Budget last time. And he was the only Finance Minister who said he could not care less for what the stock markets felt about his Budget.
Now look at the sleight of hand involved in the Finance Minister's claims on infrastructure. See the provision for the road sector. It is an additional Rs. 2,374 crore — just a 13 per cent rise in the coming year over the current year, against a 23 per cent rise in the current year over the previous one. The additional provision for the Railways is Rs. 950 crore — the rise of a mere 6 per cent for the coming year over the current year against the rise of — believe it, 46.3 per cent — in the current year over the previous year. In 2009-10 the additional provision for urban infrastructure was 87 per cent.
There is more. The Finance Minister had claimed in his Budget speech for 2009-10 that India Infrastructure Finance Company Limited (IIFCL), along with the banks, was in a position to support infrastructure projects of — again believe it — Rs. 100,000 crore. Against that claim, he admits in his speech now that the disbursement and refinance by IIFCL so far has been to the extent of just Rs. 12,000 crore. It will rise to Rs. 25,000 crore in the next three years. How did the Finance Minister dare say one thing in his previous speech and another thing now? He was confident that the experts who would give instant opinions on his product would hardly have the time to check what he had claimed some eight months ago. The claim by the Finance Minister that the infrastructure provision of Rs. 172,552 crore is 40 per cent of the Plan allocation is definitely less than honest. Acting cleverly, here he does not give the comparative figures for the current year.
Indeed, there was no appreciable improvement in the coming year over the current year, and yet the experts continued to eulogise the infrastructure boost in the Budget.
Deficit reduction
What, then, is the secret of the reduction in deficit? The Finance Minister simply refused to spend this year. And that is perhaps correct. But he has concealed that fact and said something to the contrary. The income will increase in 2010-11, but the expenditure will not. The increase in non-Plan expenditure in 2009-10 over 2008-09 was 37 per cent; in 2010-11 over 2010-11 is just 6 per cent. The non-Plan expenditure was Rs. 6,42,000 crore in 2009-10, and in the coming year it will be just Rs. 6,44,000 crore. That is, there will be just no increase at all. If the Finance Minister had increased non-Plan expenditure for 2010-11 in proportion to the estimated GDP rise of 12.5 per cent, the deficit would have risen by Rs. 199,000 crore to Rs. 580,000 crore-plus. It would have meant that the deficit would have been up by — believe it — almost 2.9 per cent to some 8.4 per cent.
If this had happened, would the experts have gone gaga over the Budget? Would the stock market have risen? Obviously not.
See how faulty the comment that the Budget puts extra money in the hands of the consumers is. Non-Plan expenditure is a straight injection of money into the system. If that does not grow next year as it did in the previous year, how will the consumer get extra money over the last year? The Finance Minister's claim that he had cut taxes to put extra cash into the consumer's pocket is less than honest as the amount in the consumer's hands will be actually less by Rs. 180,000 crore as compared to the last year. It is not a bad thing that the Finance Minister has cut the non-development expenditure. But his claim that he was putting money into the hands of the people through tax cuts is only one side of the story.
The other side of the story, which is the biggest fact concealed in this budget, is the cut in non-Plan expenditure. See more. The biggest component of the rise in non-Plan expenditure in the current year was the Pay Commission dues, which was extra money straight into the pockets of the people to spend. That was the reason why, despite the downturn in the economy in 2009-10, private consumption, which was expected to fall according to the Economic Survey 2008-09, did not fall. Private consumption powered by the Pay Commission dues sustained the GDP growth in 2009-10, and that was the secret of the growth in 2009-10. This factor is absent in 2010-11. How will the aggregate demand rise more than last year when the amount of additional money in the hands of the people is far less in the coming year than in the year that is closing? So the claim that the tax cut will put huge money in consumers' hands and activate the domestic demand is less than honest.
In sum, the Finance Minister's speech intends to conceal more than it reveals – in fact it cheats. The Finance Minister has trusted of the propensity of the instant commentators of the TV channels to rely on ornamented words in the budget speech and won the day against the experts and the market.
Corrections and Clarifications
The ninth paragraph of an article "How the experts have been fooled" (Op-Ed, February 27, 2010) was "..The increase in non-Plan expenditure in 2009-10 over 2008-09 was 37 per cent; in 2010-11 over 2010-11 is just 6 per cent. The non-Plan expenditure was Rs. 6,42,000 crore in 2009-10, and in the coming year it will be just Rs. 6,44,000 crore." The non plan expenditure in the 2009-2010 budget was Rs. 6,95,689 crore which is enhanced to Rs. 7,35,657 crore. In the text of the 2010-2011 budget, point no. 113 states: "The total expenditure proposed in the Budget Estimates for 2010-11 is Rs.11,08,749 crore, which is an increase of 8.6 per cent over the total expenditure in BE 2009-10. The Plan and Non Plan expenditures in BE 2010-11 are estimated at Rs.3,73,092 crore and Rs.7,35,657 crore, respectively."
155) Budget 2010-11: the true picture
C.P. Chandrasekhar
A combination of inflationary taxation, significant revenue optimism and a modicum of window dressing.
In a budget speech which was tiresome in parts and often filled with trivia that was almost meant to distract, Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee claimed that he was delivering a growth-oriented but inclusive budget that was within the bounds of fiscal prudence. If true this does signal the emergence of a new form of economic governance. The Economic Survey had earlier argued that the time had come for a shift to an “enabling” rather than an interventionist state. That shift was supposed to deliver non-intrusive governance that only seeks to help those who cannot manage to do well for themselves. In the process it was supposed to ensure fiscal consolidation through a reduction in the fiscal deficit.
The difficulty of course is that in a country where as much as 40-50 per cent of the population is poor, properly financing even this “minimalist” role for the state needs a substantial sum of money. If in addition the government, given its fiscal conservatism, wants to exit its fiscal stimulus and reduce its fiscal deficit, a substantial increase in revenues is necessary. There are, therefore, two questions that arise. To start with, how far has the Finance Minister gone in sustaining expenditures and pushing his objective of being more inclusive? And, to the extent he has, how has he mobilised the requisite resources and what are the resulting implications?
If we examine total expenditure in the budget, it has risen by just 8.5 per cent in nominal terms. Adjusting for inflation at current rates this amounts to a stagnation of real expenditures. But given the fact that financial year 2009-10 was one in which expenditures did rise noticeably because of the implementation of the Pay Commission's recommendations and because of the fiscal stimulus in response to the slowdown in growth, this stagnation in real expenditures cannot be dismissed as wholly inadequate. Moreover, if we examine the central plan outlay and aggregate expenditures in two social sector areas — education and health — which the Finance Minister has chosen to draw attention to in his speech, we find that they are indeed projected to rise significantly. Gross expenditure on Literacy and School Education is slated to rise from Rs. 39,553 crore to Rs. 47,773 crore and on Higher Education from Rs. 14,376 crore to Rs. 16,690 crore. In addition, the Central plan outlay on Health and Family Welfare is projected to rise from Rs. 18,283 crore to Rs. 22,300 crore. But, all this is partly the result of a reallocation of expenditures. Thus, non-plan expenditures on all social services are slated to fall from Rs. 35,146 crore to Rs. 29,483 crore or more than Rs. 5,500 crore. To boot, a planned cut in subsidies on food and fertilizer, which would impact on the poor and sectors like agriculture that house a majority of the poor, is reflected in the budgetary figures.
These trends aside, it is true that the budget provides for an increase in aggregate expenditures in nominal terms. This rise is accompanied by some direct tax concessions in the form of substantially “broadened” income slabs for different levels of income taxation and a reduction in the surcharge on corporate taxes. Yet, the budget expects a reduction in the revenue deficit from 5.3 to 4 per cent of GDP and the fiscal deficit from 6.7 to 5.5 per cent of GDP. How has the Finance Minister ensured this transition? To start with, even though direct tax concessions are expected to result in a decline in Income Tax receipts of around Rs. 4,400 crore between the revised estimates for 2009-10 and the budget estimates for 2010-11, Corporation taxes are projected to rise by as much as Rs. 46,255 crore. The latter occurs despite the fact that the surcharge on corporate taxes is to be reduced from 10 to 7.5 per cent. There are only two ways in which the substantial increase in Corporation taxes can be explained. One is an assumption that the increase in the Minimum Alternate Tax to be paid by corporations from 15 to 18 per cent would substantially increase revenues. The other is that corporate profits would display strong buoyancy in the aftermath of the recovery.
But even this Corporation tax bonanza is inadequate to explain the Finance Minister's “achievements.” There are three other features of the budget that are of relevance. First, through an “across-the-board” hike in non-oil excise duties, adjustments in customs duties, higher duties on oil and petroleum products and expanded taxes on services, the Finance Minister expects to garner an additional Rs. 70,000 crore of indirect tax revenue. This is a reversal of the practice of relying less on indirect and more on direct taxes in recent years. Indirect taxes are known to be inflationary in nature, hurting the poor in the process. So this trend goes contrary to the claim that the budget aims to be more inclusive. In fact, in the run up to the budget, with the evidence pointing to a recovery in GDP growth, the close to 20 per cent inflation in food prices had emerged as the principal problem to be addressed. The decision to rely on inflationary indirect taxes (including on universal intermediates like oil products that would raise costs and prices across the board), which would push up prices further, points to the fact that inclusiveness is less of an objective than the Economic Survey and the Budget proclaim. This perception is supported by the fact that in a context of food price inflation the budget seeks to curtail food and fertilizer subsidies.
A second noteworthy feature of the budget is the unusual fact that an item called “Other Non-tax Revenue” is slated to rise from Rs. 36,845 crore to Rs. 74,571 crore between the revised estimates for 2009-10 and the budget estimates for 2010-11. This huge revenue windfall is to come largely from receipts from ‘Other Communication Services', which consist of licence fees from telecom operators and receipts on account of spectrum usage charges. Receipts under this head were budgeted for Rs. 48,335 crore in 2009-10, but yielded only Rs. 13,795 crore. The budget for 2010-11 again provides for Rs. 49,780 crore from this head of “revenue”, suggesting that what is being calculated is the receipts from the auction of spectrum. If this is the case, it would be wrong to treat this as a revenue receipt. If it is not, the revenue and fiscal deficits would go up substantially.
Finally, the budget provides for “Miscellaneous capital receipts” of Rs. 40,000 crore in 2010-11, which refer to receipts from disinvestment and privatization. This head is reported to have yielded Rs. 26,000 crore in 2009-10. If not for this sale of public wealth, the borrowing required to finance the government's expenditures would have been much more, necessitating higher commitments for interest and amortization payments in future. That would have made it difficult for the Finance Minister to claim that he was not merely delivering inclusive growth, but doing so while remaining fiscally “prudent”.
In sum, it does appear that a combination of inflationary taxation, significant revenue optimism and a modicum of window dressing have helped craft a budget that appears growth oriented, partially inclusive and fiscally prudent. We need not wait till the revised estimates come next year to conclude that this is by no means the true picture.
156) Georgia continues to pose “direct and immediate threat”
Vladimir Radyuhin
In August 2008, Russia had its own Kargil. On the night of August 7-8 the former Soviet state of Georgia launched an assault on its breakaway region of South Ossetia killing dozens of Russian peacekeepers stationed in the region. Russia responded with a devastating counter-strike that routed the Georgian military.
For all their differences, above all duration, the wars in Kargil and in South Ossetia had certain similarities. In both conflicts the attackers sought to occupy territory. Both Pakistan and Georgia tried to mislead international public opinion about the nature of the conflict. While Islamabad denied the involvement of its regulars in the attack, Tbilisi claimed it was only responding to a Russian attack. Both assailants attempted to internationalise the conflict but miscalculated.
Like India, Russia drew its lessons from the war in South Ossetia, and these may be of interest to the Indian defence community.
The first strictly military analysis of the war was recently brought out by the Moscow-based Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (CAST), a premier Russian defence think tank. “The Tanks of August” is a 144-page collection of essays on the background, conduct, and fallout of the five-day Russian-Georgian war of August 2008.
In contrast to Kargil, the attack on South Ossetia did not take Russia by surprise. Its intelligence agencies had gathered enough information about Georgia's designs, short of the exact date of attack, in order to prepare contingency plans. According to CAST experts, Russia had assembled substantial forces in the region that began pouring into South Ossetia through the Roki Tunnel within an hour after the Georgian attack. A minute-by-minute account of the hostilities gleaned by poring through Russian, Georgian and international sources convincingly debunks Georgia's myth that it only responded to a Russian attack. The speed and power of the Russian counter-attack, apparently unexpected by Georgia, foiled its plan to seal off the only lifeline road linking Russia and South Ossetia across the North Caucasus mountains. This was the key to defeating the Georgian blitzkrieg.
In South Ossetia the Russian armed forces for the first time faced a western-style army, trained by U.S. and Turkish instructors and armed by many NATO countries and Israel. Even though the Georgian army failed to stand up to the Russian military because of organisational, training and command deficiencies, the CAST study warns against complacency. Within a year of the conflict Georgia not only rebuilt its armed forces, but “substantially enhanced” its combat power .
The conflict — Russia's biggest combat engagement outside its borders since the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan — showed that its army is a formidable force, but has important weaknesses. The main among these are outdated communications and poor coordination among different branches of the armed forces. According to CAST analysts, out of six aircraft Russia lost in the conflict, four succumbed to “friendly fire.”
The conflict prompted Moscow to speed up a radical overhaul of the armed forces to prepare them better for local conflicts. In the opinion of CAST experts, the reform is creating certain risks for Russia as it leads to a temporary weakening of its military might while Georgia may be gearing for a new attack.
“Georgia remains a flashpoint of instability and a source of potential aggression and war in the Caucasus,” the study says. “Georgia's military build-up has a patently revanchist character and… a growing anti-Russian thrust, and is oriented, not so much at retaking Abkhazia and South Ossetia, as militarily challenging Russia itself.” The “Tanks of August” study comes to the conclusion that Georgia continues to pose a “direct and immediate threat” to Russia.
157) Climate change: wetlands play an important role
Experts said here on Friday that wetlands can greatly help Vietnam cope with the impacts of climate change. The remarks were made at a conference on wetland conservation held here by the Vietnamese General Department of Environment under the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, with the participation of many Vietnamese and foreign experts. At the conference, the experts said mangrove forests growing in wetlands are able to accumulate carbon dioxide which can reduce green house effect, the main factor of climate change.
Being one of the worst affected countries by climate change in the world, Vietnam needs international assistance in establishing the programme for the conservation and sustainable development of wetlands to reduce the climate change impacts, said the experts. — Xinhua
Corrections and Clarifications
• The third paragraph of a box item “Dubai effect on exports, remittances” (“Business” page, February 26, 2010) that said the United Arab Emirates (UAE) accounts for about 10 per cent of India's $490 billion trade in 2008-09 is right. It is not $49 billion as a reader has suggested. India's $490 billion trade (exports $170 billion and imports $320 billion) comprises both imports and exports. Ten per cent of this accounts for the UAE's trade.
• It's the All Parties Hurriyat Conference (APHC), and not the All Party Hurriyat Conference as given in the eighth paragraph of a report “I have come to bridge differences, says Pakistan Foreign Secretary” (February 25, 2010).
• The fifth paragraph of a New Delhi report “‘One-eighth of total funds for new tracks for Karnataka'” (February 25, 2010) misspelt the place names Chikmagalur, Sakleshpur and Chikballapur as Chickmagalur, Sankleshpur and Chickballapur. In another report “Bonanza: seven new trains for [Karnataka] State” (February 25, 2010), Chikballapur was misspelt as Chickaballapur.
• It's Vadodara, and not Vadodra as given in the fourth paragraph of a report “Godhra ‘witness' escapes to tell his story” (February 25, 2010).
It is the policy of The Hindu to correct significant errors as soon as possible. Please specify the edition (place of publication), date and page.
The Readers' Editor's office can be contacted by
Telephone: +91-44-28418297/28576300 (11 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday to Friday);
Fax: +91-44-28552963;
E-mail: readerseditor@thehindu.co.in
Mail: Readers' Editor, The Hindu, Kasturi Buildings,
859 & 860 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002, India.
All communication must carry the full postal address and telephone number.
No personal visits.
The Terms of Reference for the Readers' Editor are on www.thehindu.com
158) Talk about Afghanistan
Yet again, Indians have been killed in Afghanistan in a brazen attack in the heart of Kabul. The victims also included civilians of other nationalities, besides Afghans. The attack has come at a time when the Taliban are thought to have suffered some military setbacks. Much has been made of the recent success of the United States and Afghan forces in clearing the militants from Marjah, a town in Helmand province. A local government of sorts has been installed in the town. The recent arrests of key Afghan Taliban leaders by Pakistan, including Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, have also been projected as a positive development even though doubts exist about Pakistani motives for the arrests. The Kabul bombing has shown that contrary to the projected impact of these developments, the Taliban retain the capacity to strike at will targets of their choosing. Although the Taliban spokesman told the New York Times that Europeans, and not Indians, were the main target of the February 26 double suicide bombing-cum-car bombing, the fact is that at least six of the 16 people killed and many of the injured were Indian nationals. One of the two guesthouses targeted by the attackers was used mainly by Indians. Indeed, New Delhi has already condemned it as an attack aimed at India and Indian interests in Afghanistan, and media reports have placed it in the same category as the deadly bombings targeting the Indian Embassy in Kabul in 2008 and 2009.
While the evidence from the ground is not conclusive about the target, the bombing more importantly underlines the vulnerability of Indians living and working in Afghanistan. Some elements in the region are dead set against any Indian involvement in that country. The statement by Minister of External Affairs S.M. Krishna that the attack was the “handiwork” of those who want to undermine the friendship between India and Afghanistan is bound to be interpreted as a veiled reference to Pakistan, which has made no secret of its opposition to a role for India in its western neighbour. If the bombing, which came a day after the Indian and Pakistan foreign secretaries held talks, was an attempt to scupper the tentative steps that the two countries are taking to revive a dialogue, it should not be allowed to succeed. Instead, engagement must be seen by both sides as an opportunity to talk frankly about Afghanistan. New Delhi must make the point that it has longstanding ties of trade and culture with Kabul and that these are not inimical to Pakistan. At the same time, Islamabad needs to stop viewing Afghanistan as a zero-sum game with India.
159) Effective financial regulation
A significant announcement in the budget pertaining to the financial sector is that about setting up a new apex body to strengthen and institutionalise the mechanism for maintaining financial stability. The Financial Stability and Development Council, as it will be called, will monitor macro prudential supervision of the economy, including the functioning of large conglomerates, and address inter-regulatory concerns. Earlier attempts to create such a body did not fructify for various reasons. It was felt that a “super regulator” would not preserve the autonomy of individual regulators, such as the RBI, SEBI and the IRDA. However, there has been considerable vagueness about the functions of financial regulators, as evidenced by certain recent, well publicised cases. For instance, it is not clear whether SEBI or the RBI will supervise the recently introduced interest rate futures. There is ambiguity over the popular unit-linked insurance schemes, with both SEBI and the IRDA claiming jurisdiction. Instances such as these will only increase, as financial innovation will bring in relatively complex products that combine the features of capital market instruments and banking and insurance products. As in other countries, disintermediation in the financial sector and the emergence of financial conglomerates will pose major regulatory challenges that would require a great degree of co-ordination among several regulators. The proposal to license new private banks raises many practical questions. On no account should the RBI dilute its licensing criteria. The private banks that came into being in the early 1990s have had a mixed track record and only a handful of them, promoted by the erstwhile development financial institutions, have flourished.
The decision to provide additional capital to four public sector banks and some regional rural banks is welcome. However, the government will have to think of new ways to maintain capital adequacy in some of the banks owned by it without divesting its majority equity stake. The role of the India Infrastructure Finance Company will come under scrutiny. It has not so far been the catalyst it was expected to be in stepping up the financial resources needed for infrastructure. With an additional investment in infrastructure bonds up to Rs.20,000 qualifying for tax relief, this grossly underfunded area should attract long term savings. The decision to provide banking facilities by 2012 to centres with a population above 2,000 will promote financial inclusion significantly. Around 60,000 habitations are to be covered in the process, which will involve harnessing technology as well as conceptualising and implementing new, cost-effective banking models.
160) And yet another pro-farmer budget
P. Sainath
This is a budget crafted for, and perhaps by, the corporate farmer and agribusiness.
The real heroes of India's success story were our farmers. Through their hard work, they ensured “food security” for the country. — Pranab Mukherjee, interim budget speech Feb. 16, 2009
This Budget belongs to 'Aam Aadmi'. It belongs to the farmer, the agriculturist, the entrepreneur and the investor. — Pranab Mukherjee, budget speech, Feb. 26, 2010
Gee! Another pro-farmer budget. Going by the media, every budget this past decade has been one. Editorials across ten years have always found “a new thrust” to agriculture that spelt “good news” for the farmer. Rarely mentioned are the massive subsidies, now larger than ever before, for the Corporate sector. This year alone, the budget gifts over Rs. 500,000 crore in write-offs, direct and indirect, to the Big Boys. That's Rs. 57 crore every single hour on average — almost a crore a minute. Beating last year's Rs. 30 crore an hour by more than 70 per cent. (See Tables 5 and 12 of the “Statement of Revenue Foregone” section of the budget.)
Maybe the pro-farmer claim was merely a typo or proofing error. They just dropped the word “corporate” before “farmer.” Reinstate that and all is true. This is a budget crafted for, and perhaps by, the corporate farmer and agribusiness.
Some television Channels set the tone for the debate before the budget in giant hoardings: Will Pranab Mukherjee function “like the CEO of India Inc., or will he behave like a politician?” The message was straight: the finance minister's job is to serve India Inc. not the people of India. A second ad in this series read: “Will FM's speech DESTROY or CREATE Market Wealth?” In the event, the Finance Minister more than lived up to their demands. The budget hands out new bonanzas for Corporate Kleptocrats. It goes further than earlier ones in pushing the private sector as prime driver of development and economy. Not the public sector.
Take Mr. Mukherjee's “four-pronged strategy” for agriculture. The first of these, “agricultural production,” could mean anything. The other three are a goldmine for large corporations, not the countless millions of small and marginal farmers who produce India's food. Take “Reduction in wastage of produce.” This means more big bucks for companies setting up storage facilities. Take this together with the related “Credit Support to farmers.” Already, an Ambani or a Godrej can set up a cold storage in Mumbai and get agricultural rates of credit for it. That's thanks to our re-jigging of what “agricultural credit” and “priority sector lending” mean. This budget takes that process further.
More and more of “agricultural” credit will go not to farmers but corporations. Indeed, “even External Commercial Borrowings will henceforth be available for cold storage or cold room facility.” The budget even says: “Changes in the definition of infrastructure under the ECB policy are being made” to foster this process. Some of those changes have already happened. Several of the loans disbursed as “agricultural credit” are in excess of Rs. 10 crore and even Rs. 25 crore. And even as loans of this size steadily grew in number between 2000 and 2006, agricultural loans of less than Rs. 25,000 fell by more than half in the same period. (See Revival of Agricultural Credit in the 2000s: An Explanation. R. Ramakumar and Pallavi Chavan, EPW December 29, 2007.)
Met any subsistence farmers taking out Rs. 25 crore loans lately? Nor will it be small or marginal farmers availing of the “full exemption from customs duty to refrigeration units required for the manufacture of refrigerated vans or trucks.” Nor is the “infusion of technology” proclaimed going to help them.
The budget promises “appropriate banking facilities” in every village with a population of over 2000. Since 1993, the number of rural branches of scheduled commercial banks has steadily fallen, even as the rural population has grown. So taken together with the licenses to be given out to private operators, this means the new branches will be those of private banks. Not one of whom has an iota of interest in small and marginal farmers. Nor are they bound by the social banking obligations that once guided the nationalised sector. “A thrust to the food processing sector” is exactly the same. More cash for big companies. You know who the “state-of-the-art infrastructure” will be built for — with public money.
Of the many claims the media have dished out for weeks now, none is more absurd than the fiction that farmers have gained massively from soaring food prices. And that rural India is doing so well, its saving the rest of us. (And doing that on a projected growth of minus 0.2 per cent).
Higher MSPs certainly helped ease pressure. So have higher global prices for some products in a few cases - briefly. But with higher food prices, with retail prices rising many times faster than wholesale, where does the farmer begin to benefit? Farm gate prices are way below those of even the wholesale markets. Further, over 70 per cent of Indian farmers are net purchasers of foodgrain. (Between 55 per cent and 60 per cent of the average Indian farm household's monthly per capita expenditure goes on food.) Huge rises in food prices crush them. Remember the excuse trotted out for letting Big Retail sell agricultural produce? It would do away with the “middleman,” giving farmers and consumers a better deal. Yet prices of fresh produce are costlier at big retail's outlets. You still get a better deal from the petty vendor on the street. Often, that pathetic “middleman” they're crushing is a poor woman street vendor. The last and weakest link in the chain of intermediaries between farmer and public. The new middlemen wear suits.
The ‘higher-prices-benefit-farmers' mob seems clueless about what has happened with cultivation costs. It took Rs. 2,500, for instance, to cultivate an acre of cotton in Vidarbha in 1991. Rs. 13,500 in 2006-07 and Rs. 18,000 to Rs. 20,000 today. (Counting family labour and like costs). The 'gains' from these higher costs are cornered by the corporate world in sectors like seed, fertiliser and pesticide. Soaring input costs have been crucial to farm bankruptcies, debt and suicides. The looming cuts in fertiliser subsidies won't spark rural euphoria either.
An incentive to repay loans on time — which millions of farmers cannot do — is being passed off as an additional subsidy to the aam kisan in this budget. And there is still an air of self-congratulation on the Rs. 70,000-crore farm loan waiver of 2008. A one-off waiver that comes once in so many decades. Yet revenue foregone in this budget in direct tax concessions to corporate tax payers is close to Rs. 80,000 crores. It was over Rs. 66,000 crore last year. And Rs. 62,000 crore the year before that. In all, Rs. 2,08,000 crores of direct freebies in 36 months.
Consider that this loot-and-grab sortie has been on for two decades now. It means that in direct tax freebies alone the corporate sector has had the equivalent of some 15 'farm loan waivers' since 1991. Then there's the indirect stuff. In this year's budget: Revenue foregone in excise duty — Rs. 1,70,765 crores. Customs duty — Rs.2,49,021 crores. Together with the Rs.80,000 crore in direct write-offs, the total nears Rs. 500,000 crores.
The media's shameless lobbying for Corporate “wishlists” began weeks before the budget. A class and vested interest analysis of the writers, panels, discussants, “experts” (and anchors) would be edifying. Budget time is when Big media are seen for what they are: stenographers to the powerful.
Ill-informed aam aadmi rants in the streets are quickly 'balanced' by ‘the experts.' Sure, there is, in a few panels, the odd dissenter. This discussant the anchor always turns to with a wry smile of amused tolerance. The unstated message to viewers: “here's this whacko with his loony left delusions. Accept him as the comic relief in what are otherwise serious discussions.”
Never mind that some of these deluded dissenters warned — correctly — of the type of crisis that shook the world in 2008. Not one of the “experts” ever came within miles of predicting that meltdown. They were in fact proclaiming the Golden Age to be upon us when their babble hit the fan. But no questions on their competence. Many of the “experts” have direct ties to large corporations and peddle their interests with zest. Sometimes, with a little more sophistication than panting media hucksters who show not a trace of the scepticism their profession demands of them. Straining at the leash to beat their rivals in serving the richest 1 per cent (or less) of Indians.
Mr. Mukherjee's budget speech spouts dated World Bank babble about the “the focus of economic activity” shifting “towards the non-governmental actors.” And about “the role of Government as an enabler.” (Private corporations and football clubs also qualify as non-governmental actors, but never mind). “An enabling Government does not try to deliver directly to the citizens everything that they need. Instead it creates an enabling ethos...” His budget does that. It enables a grasping corporate world to grab more public wealth. And the entrenchment of perhaps of the most parasitic elite in the planet.
161) For “a world of decreased nuclear risk”
P. S. Suryanarayana
Japan and Australia have delved into “ideas” that can lead to a half-way house towards a peaceful global atomic order.
PHOTO: AFP
Japanese Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada (right) and his Australian counterpart Stephen Smith at a press conference in Perth last week.
Is a “world without nuclear weapons” a less-than-utopian goal which the global politicians of a misty future era could seek to attain? Taking a positive view, Japan and Australia have now begun to outline “ideas” about “practical steps” towards such a global order. Their move was timed for the end-February announcement that United States President Barack Obama would convene a Nuclear Security Summit in April.
It is not as if “practical steps” or even the dream of a nuclear-weapons-free world are strikingly original thoughts. It is simply a matter, though, of such public discourse finding some resonance now in the inner recesses of a power bloc. This marks a shift of such discourse from India, an original home of these thoughts, to the citadels of today's superpower in distress, namely the U.S. And, the evolving context is that Mr. Obama surprised many last year by affirming a U.S. desire to strive for a world without nuclear weapons.
Japanese Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada and his Australian counterpart Stephen Smith issued a Statement after their talks in Perth on February 21. Their ideas flowed from the recent report of the non-governmental International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament (ICNND). It was co-chaired by former Australian Foreign Minister Gareth Evans and former Japanese Foreign Minister Yoriko Kawaguchi. The panel, which included India's Brajesh Mishra among others, was the result of a political initiative by Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. And, Japan, for long a nuclear pacifist, joined forces with Rudd's Australia in this domain.
Japan and Australia have a strategic trilateral link with the U.S. To this extent, any new nuances in Washington's policies or visions produce a cascading effect on the world-views of both Tokyo and Canberra. Unlike Japan, Australia is a relative late-convert to the “cause” of total nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. Yet, this makes no difference to their basking in Mr. Obama's vision which, in Mr. Okada's view, “dramatically changed” the mood for nuclear disarmament.
An important factor in such companionship is the Japan-Australia declaration of March 2007 on their bilateral security cooperation. So, they are unsurprisingly “eager [now] to take a lead ... to make a [positive] difference” to the efforts for creating a world without nuclear weapons. Indeed, Japan and Australia “are both very responsible and capable non-nuclear [-armed] states,” said a top Japanese official Kazuo Kodama on February 25. Another relevant commonality between these two countries is that they also rely on the U.S. “nuclear umbrella” or “extended deterrence.” Mr. Kodama told this journalist that “we do not have any concerns” that the U.S. might downgrade its nuclear umbrella for Japan in this new ambience. At the same time, Tokyo would “not call” for a U.S. policy that might “contradict the goal of a world without nuclear weapons.”
Beyond such official nuances, it is clear that the limitations of Mr. Obama's initiative are reflected in the follow-up moves of his associates in ally-states. He is still unprepared for the political equivalent of a space odyssey for exploring the uncharted universe of a peaceful nuclear order for humanity. His dilemma is germane to the current status of the U.S. as the premier nuclear superpower.
In this complexity, Japan and Australia have pledged to help countries with atomic energy programmes to stay clear of the nuclear-weapons path. The idea is to accept the “global trend” of many states choosing the atomic-energy route to produce electricity in a planet-friendly way. Mr. Okada and Mr. Smith decided to assist such countries in the realm of what is known as “3S”. As shorthand, “3S” stands, collectively, for safeguards, safety and security under the auspices of the International Atomic Energy Agency Mr. Okada and Mr. Smith also delved into other “ideas” to “realise a world of decreased nuclear risk on the way to a world without nuclear weapons”.
A possible “world of decreased nuclear risk” is, in this perspective, a half-way house towards a totally peaceful global atomic order. Just two “ideas,” taken from the report of the ICNND, were emphasised by Japan and Australia for reducing the existing “nuclear risks” in the world.
One such “idea” is “enhancing the effectiveness of [the] security assurances” which one or more nuclear-armed states can give the world at large. Typically, such “assurances” would be designed to refrain from using or threatening to use nuclear weapons against countries without such devices.
Another key “idea” is to reinforce the effectiveness of the doctrine of nuclear deterrence in a selective fashion. In focus is the assurance that a state might give to “retain [atomic] weapons solely for the purpose of deterring others from using such weapons”.
Japan and Australia have now selectively conceded deterrence as some kind of a right that could be invoked by a nuclear-armed state. However, Tokyo and Canberra have not conceded the right of deterrence for the acquisition of atomic weapons by the states in a grey zone of “proliferation.” Unsurprisingly, therefore, North Korea and Iran were singled out by Mr. Okada and Mr. Smith for various forms of condemnation and concern. Significantly, the latest Japan-Australia Statement is silent on Pakistan as a state that causes concern to the collective global fraternity of experts and leaders.
In a recent article, Graham Allison of Harvard University has cited Pakistan as a country that poses a “challenge” to the current “fragile ... global nuclear order.” Pakistan figures alongside Iran and North Korea in this thesis. The relevant reasoning is related to Pakistan's “increasing instability.” The crux of the argument is: “If Pakistan were to lose control of even one nuclear weapon that was ultimately used by terrorists, that [event] would change the world ... and alter conceptions of a viable nuclear order”.
It is understood on good authority that Japan and Australia have at this stage chosen not to focus on Pakistan because it is a de-facto nuclear-armed state. This surely is fine procedural logic. Pakistan, unlike North Korea, has not acceded to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) for any period of time. However, “practical steps” towards a peaceful global nuclear order, via the half-way house of “decreased nuclear risk”, cannot leave out Pakistan.
Mr. Obama and Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama had, last November, issued a Statement with a larger sweep of a more universal kind. However, lofty principles rather than practical measures defined the tenor of that document. Of interest to India, the U.S. and Japan had spelt out their intent to “explore ways to enhance a new framework for civil nuclear cooperation”. The bottom-line should be that the peaceful use of atomic energy cannot be denied to those not recognised as nuclear-armed states under the NPT.
162) How investors grow their own start-ups
Ashlee Vance and Claire Cain Miller
The print hanging behind the receptionist's desk at Foundation Capital screams, “our greatest thrill is to loan you money'' in chunky, capitalised red letters. That's encouraging news for Michael Bauer, because he wants money and has put himself in a prime position to get it.
Bauer has set up shop on the second floor of Foundation Capital's offices at Menlo Park, California. to pursue his dream of creating an energy company from scratch. He pays no rent to operate out of the building, which is designed to evoke a Mediterranean villa. And he's free to enjoy all the trappings of this venture capital firm, including its ample parking, woodsy surroundings and outdoor patio.
Bauer has won these cozy environs through a new role as an “entrepreneur in residence.” This coveted position, called an EIR in Silicon Valley shorthand, is emblematic of the valley's economy of ideas. Most EIR's receive a monthly stipend of up to $15,000 to sit and think for about six months. In return, the venture capital firm usually gets the first shot at financing the idea that emerges from this meditation.
Track record of success
“The EIR takes out some of the risk because they are known quantities,” said Adam Grosser, a partner at Foundation Capital. “They have a track record of success and a proven ability to disrupt a market with their ideas.”
Venture capital firms have been struggling to find a company that will make them not just rich, but fabulously rich. They dream about investing in the next Intel, Apple, Sun Microsystems, Yahoo or Google. But after Google appeared in 1998, the hunt to find the next superprofitable household name stalled. The likes of Facebook and Twitter have garnered plenty of attention but have yet to strike on a business model capable of sending an IPO into the stratosphere. Ten-year returns for the venture capital industry have sunk to 8.4 per cent, annualised, in the decade ended last Sept. 30, from 40.2 per cent in the 10 years ended Sept. 30, 2008, a number inflated by the spectacular success of Google and other dot-com companies at the beginning of that period.
The entrepreneur-in-residence model has gained prominence as a calculated way for a venture capital firm to nurture a successful company into being and to increase the odds of solid returns. The firms often tap someone who has successfully started and sold a start-up, hoping that lightning will strike twice.
Bauer, for instance, has experience in fields ranging from high-speed Internet video to clean technologies.
“One part of the venture capital business is to write humongous cheques to people for ideas,” he says. “Before you write that cheque, you want to be comfortable with the people and be sure the money will be well spent.”
The villa, the executive assistant and the clubby lunches are not exactly the stuff of Silicon Valley legend, which abounds with tales of wild success sprouting from a garage or a dorm room where a pair of geeky unknowns toiled away, unable to keep their unconventional ideas in check. Cases in point are William Hewlett and David Packard, Steven P. Jobs and Steve Wozniak, and Sergey Brin and Larry Page.
Silicon Valley has had a knack for finding at least one of these remarkable pairings just about every decade. They're the creators of new industries — chips, PCs, servers, Web sites and ad-fuelled search systems — on which others build. But lately, companies started by EIRs have done yeoman work for the venture capitalists.
The investment firm New Enterprise Associates, for example, hit it big last year when the storage giant EMC bought Data Domain for $2.3 billion, the largest acquisition in 2009 of a venture-backed technology company. (The average deal that year was just $144 million.)
The Data Domain story grew out of a chance encounter. Kai Li, who would be a co-founder of the company, was on sabbatical from his job as a computer science professor. He had been thinking about some ideas for a start-up when he ran into an old friend from New Enterprise. A couple of chats later, he was an EIR.
Similarly, the biggest public offering of a venture-backed technology company in 2007 was that of MetroPCS, which raised $1.2 billion. It was started by Roger Linquist when he was an EIR at the venture capital firm Accel.
A host of other flashy companies have recently emerged from the EIR ether. Zimbra, an e-mail software start-up, was sold for $350 million to Yahoo in 2007. (In a very different economic climate this year, it was sold again to VMware for a reported $100 million.) Then there's Cloudera, one of the most-watched start-ups in Silicon Valley. It seeks to bottle the analytical smarts on which Google and Yahoo rely to understand their users' behaviour and sell the product to large corporations dealing with torrents of data. Cloudera came into being at Accel, where a pair of EIR's worked after having left Yahoo and Facebook.
Venture capital firms are closely held, so there is no data on the number of companies that the EIR process has created — or on how many of them have succeeded. But top firms say a new company is formed about 50 per cent of the time. The rest of the EIR's will either take on a job at an existing company in the venture capital firm's stable or go their own way.
It can be awkward if a venture capital firm, which knows the entrepreneur best, turns down an idea that arrives from the six months of meditation.
“Does it put a negative stigma on a company? I think the answer is definitely,” says Jeff Fagnan, a partner at Atlas Venture.
The idea of the EIR was developed in the early 1980s to maintain ties to talented people who were between jobs and to add a level of refinement to the start-up process.
“This is sort of the formalisation of innovation and new firm building,” says Andrew Feldman, the chief executive of SeaMicro, a start-up that grew out of his time as an EIR at Crosslink Capital. “The venture capital industry has matured and so, too, has venture creation.”
Leading venture capital firms today may have two or three EIRs on the payroll at any one time. An EIR typically has an office, an assistant and what people in Silicon Valley almost always refer to as a “nominal fee” of $10,000 to $15,000 a month. It's enough to tide over the elite business people whom investors are looking for, so that they aren't worried about lacking a day job for six months.
“In the days of the 9-to-5 job, you had some personal time to be creative and think of new ideas,” says Kevin Epstein, a former EIR at Mohr Davidow Ventures who now works at CloudShare, an online software start-up. “I don't see many of those jobs anymore.”
In exchange for the office and the stipend, the EIR provides a few basic services.
He or she becomes part of the audience for start-up road shows, sitting in on the daily presentations that other companies pitch to the venture capital firm and advising the investors about the ideas' merits. In addition, the EIR agrees — via contract or, more often, tacitly — to give the venture capital firm the first shot to invest in an idea.
“It is as ruthless and profit-oriented at the end of the day as anything else a V.C. does,” said Adam Gross, a former EIR at Redpoint Ventures.
Major advantages
This arrangement provides EIRs with a few major advantages over other entrepreneurs. The masses have to go to great lengths just to get in the door of a venture capitalist's office, while EIRs work there daily. They can sit in on Monday-morning partner meetings and pitches, and they can consult with the partners in the lunch line.
And, when EIRs are ready to test an idea, they can tap the vast network of contacts that the venture capital firm has built over time. This could include persuading a large company to provide feedback on a product or polling a host of companies about their technology problems.
“If you're doing surveys or trying to find out where the opportunities are, it provides you with some legitimacy to say you're an EIR at a well-known shop,” Feldman says. “You piggyback on a very rich network and sort of become part of the family.”
In addition, the process adds a touch of human companionship and vibrancy to an otherwise lonely, sedentary endeavour.
When Gross left his position as an executive at the software provider Salesforce.com, he wanted to work at a start-up but thought he needed “an intellectual palate cleanser to get a new perspective.”
At Redpoint, he saw a bunch of start-ups come in to pitch their ideas. He kept hearing about business software that incorporates elements of the consumer Web, and came up with his own idea for a software start-up.
“It's not just advice,” he said. “It's exposure to ideas and models and approaches and struggles that you wouldn't get otherwise.”
Gross left Redpoint before finishing his version of the next big thing; he received an offer from a partner at a rival firm, Sequoia Capital, to run sales and marketing at Dropbox, an online storage start-up in Sequoia's portfolio.
“I think we both would have preferred to continue working together, but they were very supportive,'' he says of Redpoint's partners.
Gross' tale highlights the rather forgiving expectations that surround the EIR gig. Still, venture capital firms take their trade in EIRs very seriously. These firms, after all, have no intellectual property of their own. They deal in relationships, and knowing smart, creative people gives one firm an edge over another.
When, for example, a large acquisition like Oracle's purchase of Sun Microsystems is announced, the venture capitalists might hit their phones, calling 10 or so brainy people at Sun to offer them a cushy way out of dealing with an acquisition.
Many people find their way into an EIR role through a fortuitous lunch or a meeting in the hallway of another company. The process requires a certain level of hand-holding, as the prospective investors guide the entrepreneur.
But that hasn't stopped people from trying to copy and, one might say, commoditise the EIR idea.
